2015, Volume 17, Issue 6
Strategic Study of CAE >> 2015, Volume 17, Issue 6
Research about bacteriology on intrauterine device
West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu 610041, China
Next Previous
Abstract
Background：Intrauterine device（IUD）is one of the most popular method of longacting contraception，while concerns still exist as to whether the use of IUD increases the risk of pelvic inflammatory disease（PID）. In recent years many issues have been extensively researched about the relationship between bacterial biofilm（BF）and infectious diseases. We designed this study to investigate whether BF exists on IUD of non PID women ；and whether IUD increases the susceptibility to PID. Methods：For the study，we recruited 85 participants without PID and a PID patient who choosed IUD as a means of contraception. According to the cleanliness of IUD surface.IUD was removed and sent for scanning electron microscopy（SEM） or/and biological and fungal examination respectively to detect BF. Results：A total of 86 IUDs were recruited ，which include stainless steel ring，TCuIUD，Mirena，Multiload，McuIUD and γCu380 IUD. Among 25 IUDs which were observed with SEM alone，BF was discovered on a TCuIUD used for one month-a large number of bacilli /cocci and extracellular matrix coverd on the surface of copper. Other specimens had no significant discoveries. The result of 47 microbial culture alone was negative except for one suspected contaminated IUD. 14 IUDS were investigated via both microbial culture and SEM. A 33 year old stainless steel ring which removed because of the symptoms of pelvic pain，aerobic cultivation was positive.But there was no BF detected by SEM.The remaining 13 IUD had no positive result.Conclusions：There was no BF on surface of IUD removed from non- PID women regardless of IUD type；unlike other medical device，the formation of bacterial biofilm should not become a stumbling.
Keywords
intrauterine device ; pelvic inflammatory disease ; bacterial biofilm ; scanning electron microscopy
Figures
图1
图2
图3
图4
图5
References
[ 1 ] 国家人口计生委科技司. 12万例宫内节育器避孕效果调查报 告[J]. 中国计划生育学杂志，2007（3）：132-136. link1
[ 2 ] Burkman R T. Intrauterine device use and the risk of pelvic inflammatory disease[J]. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology，1980，138（7 Pt 2）：861-863. link1
[ 3 ] Sparks R A，Purrier B G，Watt P J，et al. The bacteriology of the cervix and uterus[J]. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology，1977，84（9）：701-704. link1
[ 4 ] Newton J R，Emens M J，Burdon D W，et al. Effects of chlorhexidine-coated intrauterine device on the bacteriology of the uterine cavity[J]. Advances in Contraception，1991，7（1）：55-65. link1
[ 5 ] Mishell D R，Bell J H，et al. The intrauterine device：A bacteriologic study of the endometrial cavity[J]. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology，1966，96（1）：119-126. link1
[ 6 ] Chicurel M. Bacterial biofilms and infections[J]. Slimebusters Nature，2000，408（6810）：284-286.
[ 7 ] Jones H C，Roth I L，Sanders W M，et al. Electron microscopic study of a slime layer[J]. Journal of Bacteriology，1969，99（1）： 316-325. link1
[ 8 ] Cryer J，Schipor I，Perloff J R，et al. Evidence of bacterial biofilms in human chronic sinusitis[J]. Journal for Oto- rhino-laryngology and Its Related Specialties，2004，66（3）：155-158. link1
[ 9 ] Direct evidence of bacterial biofilms in otitis media[J]. Laryngoscope，2001，111（12）：2083-2094. link1
[10] Vessey M P，Yeates D，Flavel R，et al. Pelvic inflammatory disease and the intrauterine device：Findings in a large cohort study [J]. British Medical Journal，1981，282（6267）：855-857. link1
[11] Yassien M. Biofilms in device- related infections[J]. Journal of Industrial Microbiology，1995，15（3）：141-147. link1
京公网安备 11010502051620号
