Sun, Jun 29, 2025
1- BVDUMC, Pune
2- Asian Institute of Medical Sciences, Dombivli
3- BVDUMC, Pune ,meeru2160@yahoo.com
2- Asian Institute of Medical Sciences, Dombivli
3- BVDUMC, Pune ,
Abstract: (181 Views)
Introduction:
Dermatophytes are group of fungi that cause superficial infections via enzymes that degrade keratin in human skin, hair and nails. Several factors, including, gender, age, lifestyle, human migration, cultural habits, and socioeconomic status influence the prevalence of dermatophyte infections. Hot and humid climate in tropical and subtropical countries like India makes Dermatophytosis a very common superficial fungal infection.
Aim/objective:
To isolate & identify dermatophytes from clinically diagnosed cases of Dermatophytosis.
Methods:
Samples from 100 clinically diagnosed cases of Dermatophytosis were processed by KOH mount and fungal culture.
Results:
Out of 100 clinically diagnosed cases, Tinea corporis 42 (42%) was the commonest clinical type followed by Tinea cruris 25 (25%), Tinea unguium 21 (21%). Out of 100 samples, 53 were culture positive. Out of 53 dermatophytes isolated, T. rubrum 16 (30%) was the commonest followed by T. mentagrophytes 11 (20%) and T. violaceum 7 (13.3%). Out of 53
isolates, 49 (92.45%) dermatophytes were isolated on SDA and 51 (96.22%) dermatophytes were isolated from Dermatophyte test medium (DTM).
Conclusion:
Isolation and identification of etiological agents of Dermatophytosis is essential for the correct diagnosis as it is important to initiate appropriate treatment and also important for epidemiological purposes. Accurate assessment of the prevalence and etiological agents is desirable to estimate the size of therapeutic problem and prevent the transmission of such infection.
Dermatophytes are group of fungi that cause superficial infections via enzymes that degrade keratin in human skin, hair and nails. Several factors, including, gender, age, lifestyle, human migration, cultural habits, and socioeconomic status influence the prevalence of dermatophyte infections. Hot and humid climate in tropical and subtropical countries like India makes Dermatophytosis a very common superficial fungal infection.
Aim/objective:
To isolate & identify dermatophytes from clinically diagnosed cases of Dermatophytosis.
Methods:
Samples from 100 clinically diagnosed cases of Dermatophytosis were processed by KOH mount and fungal culture.
Results:
Out of 100 clinically diagnosed cases, Tinea corporis 42 (42%) was the commonest clinical type followed by Tinea cruris 25 (25%), Tinea unguium 21 (21%). Out of 100 samples, 53 were culture positive. Out of 53 dermatophytes isolated, T. rubrum 16 (30%) was the commonest followed by T. mentagrophytes 11 (20%) and T. violaceum 7 (13.3%). Out of 53
isolates, 49 (92.45%) dermatophytes were isolated on SDA and 51 (96.22%) dermatophytes were isolated from Dermatophyte test medium (DTM).
Conclusion:
Isolation and identification of etiological agents of Dermatophytosis is essential for the correct diagnosis as it is important to initiate appropriate treatment and also important for epidemiological purposes. Accurate assessment of the prevalence and etiological agents is desirable to estimate the size of therapeutic problem and prevent the transmission of such infection.
Research Article: Research Article |
Subject:
Microbiology
Received: 2023/04/11 | Accepted: 2024/11/26
Received: 2023/04/11 | Accepted: 2024/11/26
References
1. Sumathi S, Mariraj J, Shafiyabi S, Ramesh R. Clinicomycological study of dermatophytes. Int J Pharm Biomed Res. 2013;4(2):132-4 [Google scholar]
2. Chander J. In: Chapter 10, Textbook of Medical Mycology. 3rd ed. New Delhi:The Health Sciences Publisher;2009. p.122-147 [View at Publisher] [Google Scholar]
3. Kannan P, Janaki C, Selvi GS. Prevalence of dermatophytes and other fungal agents isolated from clinical samples.Indian J Med Microbiol.
2006;24(3):212-5 [View at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google scholar]
4. Bhatia VK, Sharma PC. Epidemiological studies on Dermatophytosis in human patients in Himachal Pradesh, India. Spingerplus. 2014;3:134 [View at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google scholar]
5. Surendran K, Bhat RM, Boloor R, Nandakishore B, Sukumar D. A clinical and mycological study of dermatophytic infections.Indian J Dermatol. 2014;59(3):262-7 [View at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google scholar]
6. Grover S. study of onychomycosis. Indian J dermatol Venereal Leprol. 2003;45(5):36- 46 [Google Scholar]
7. Kamalam A, Thambiah AS. A study of 3891 cases of mycoses in the tropics. Sabouraudia. 1976;14(2):129-48. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google scholar]
8. Singh S, Beena PM. Comparative study of different microscopic techniques and culture media for isolation of dermatophytoses. Indian J Med Microbiol. 2003;21(1):21-4. [View at Publisher] [PMID] [Google scholar]
9. Sahai S, Mishra D. Change in spectrum of dermatophytes isolated from superficial mycoses cases: First report from central India.Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2011;77(3):335-6. [View at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google scholar]
10. Hanumanthappa H, Sarojin K, Clinicomycological study of 150 cases Dermatophytosis in a tertiary care hospital in South India. Indian J Dermatol. 2012;57(4):322-3.) [View at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google scholar]
11. Kennedy K, Kindo A, Kalyani J,Anandan S. clinicomycological profile of dermatophytic skin infections in a tertiary care center a cross sectional study. Sri ramchandra journal of Medicine. 2007;1(2):12-5 [Google scholar]
12. Doddamani PV, Harshan KH, Kanta RC, Gangane R, Sunil KB. Isolation identification and prevalence of dermatophytes in tertiary care hospital in Gulbarga district. People's J of Scientific Research. 2013;6(2):10-13 [View at Publisher] [Google Scholar]
13. Gadangi I, Reddy KR, Vishvanadh R, Rao RK, Raghuramulu G, Reddy SR. Clinicoetiological investigations on superficial mycoses of Warangal (A.P) India. Asian Pac J Dis. 2014;4(1):311-19 [View at Publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
14. Verenkar MP, Pinto MJ, Rodrigues S, Roque WP, Singh I. Clinico- Microbiological study of dermatophytoses. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 1991;34(3):186-92. [View at Publisher] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
15. Pandey A, Pandey M. Isolation and characterization of dermatophytes with tinea infections at Gwalior (MP). Int J Pharm Sci Investig. 2013;2(2):5-8. [View at Publisher] [Google Scholar]
16. Karmarkar S, Kalla G, Joshi KR, Karmarkar S. Dermatophytoses in a desert district of Western Rajasthan. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1995; 61(5):280-3. [View at Publisher] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
17. Jain N, Sharma M, Saxena VN. Clinico-mycological profile of dermatophytosis in Jaipur,Rajasthan. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2008;74(3):274-5 [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
18. Sumana V, Singaracharya MA. Dermatophytosis in Khammam (Khammam district, Andhra Pradesh, India). Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2004;47(2):287-9. [View at Publisher] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
19. Yavuzdemir S. Comparative evaluation of the isolation of the dermatophytes by direct laboratory evidence and MSDA with MDTM culture media. Mikrobiyol Bul. 1992;26(4):367-72 [View at Publisher] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
20. Madhavi S, Rama Rao M, Jyothsna K. Mycological study of Dermatophytosis in rural population . Annals of Biological Research. 2011;2(3):88–93. [View at Publisher] [Google Scholar]
21. Das S, De A, Saha R, Sharma N, Khemka M, Singh S, et al. The current Indian epidemic of dermatophytosis: A study on causative agents and sensitivity patterns. Indian J Dermatol. 2020;65(2):118-22. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google scholar]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Enamad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.