Adhesive Capabilities of Staphylococcus Aureus and Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Isolated from Tears of HIV/AIDS Patients to Soft Contact Lenses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fifty conjunctival swab samples collected from ELISA confirmed HIV/AIDS seropositive patients who were referred to the HIV/AIDS laboratories of the University of Benin Teaching Hospital and Central Hospital both based in Benin City, Nigeria were aseptically cultured on appropriate media by standard methods. The resulting isolates/strains, after identification by standard methods, were tested for their ability to adhere to two hydrophobic non-ionic daily wear silicone hydrogel soft contact lenses (i.e. lotrafilcon B, WC 33% and polymacon, WC 38%) as well as to two hydrophilic ionic conventional extended wear silicone hydrogel soft contact lenses (i.e. methafilcon A, WC 55% and omafilcon A, WC 60%) by the adhesiveness/slime production modified vortex/Robin device method. Evidence of adhesiveness/slime production was indicated by presence of a visible stained film lining the surface of the contact lens which was measured and recorded as strong or weak according to the density of the adhered bacterial film. Fourteen (28.0%) Staphylococcus aureus strains and 10 (20.0%) Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains were obtained among other organisms. Staphylococcus aureus strains adhered in decreasing order to lotrafilcon B (55.4 ± 4.7), polymacon (46.4 ± 8.4), methfilcon A (46.4 ± 8.4) and omafilcon A (25.0 ± 6.4) with no significant difference in adhesive strengths of individual strains (P > 0.05). Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains also recorded decreasing adhesive strengths to lotrafilcon B (37.5 ± 8.2), polymacon (28.6 ± 6.3), methafilcon A (26.8 ± 5.5) and omafilcon A (23.2 ± 5.5) also with no significant difference in adhesive strengths of individual strains (P > 0.05). Attachment strengths of Staph. aureus strains to all four contact lenses were higher than those of Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains. Both organisms adhered most to hydrophobic lotrafilcon B and least to hydrophilic omafilcon A. This invitro adhesion studies revealed that daily wear silicone hydrogel low water content, non-ionic contact lenses are more prone to bacterial adhesion than the conventional extended wear hydrogel high water content, ionic contact lenses and hence, there is more risk of microbial adhesion to the former compared to the latter. Other implications are highlighted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".