• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.43 no.6
• /
• pp.862-870
• /
• 1996

Background : Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis(MDR-Tb) has been increased not only in Asia but also in Western society, which may cause public health problems and reduce the efficacy of treatment of tuberculosis. In Western society HIV infection is believed to do a central role in increasing incidence of MDR tuberculosis, but MDR-Tb in Korea may be somewhat different about clinical features, underlying disorders, and prognosis. Goble et al reponed that overall treatment failure rate in MDR-Tb including resistance to isoniazid(INH) and rifampin (RFP) was 44 %. The aim of this study is to find the treatment result in Korea and the factors determining the prognosis. Methods: A retrospective study of pulmonary tuberculosis cultured M. tuberculosis from sputum or bronchial washing fluid between 1986 through 1992 was conducted in the Seoul Paik Hospital, Inje University. We reviewed clinical courses of 141 patients, who had a tuberculosis with resistance to 2 or more drugs including isoniazid(INH) and rifampin(RFP). One hundred and 4 patients of 141 patients had completed treatment and followed up for more than one year. Results: Of 104 (mean age $43.6{\pm}16.7$, M: F=63 : 41) patients with sufficient follow-up data, 73(84.6%) patients responded which is defined as negative Sputum cultures for at least 3 consecutive months. Seven patients(6.7%) had a failure in negative conversion and 9(8.7%) of the patients who initially responded relapsed. Overall treatment failure rate was 15.4%, Patients who were treated for less than 12 months had a higher relapse rate(12.3%) than 18 months(4.9%). And there was a statistically significant correlation between the relapse rate and the number of drugs to which isolates wera resistant(p<0.05). Conclusion : The treatment failure rate of MDR-Tb in Korea was lower than previous studies in western Country and the major determining factor of prognosis was the number of resistant drugs to M. tuberculosis at drug sensitivity test. For reducing the relapse rate, we recommend more than 12 months of treatment for MDR tuberculosis.

• Journal of Food Hygiene and Safety
• /
• v.39 no.1
• /
• pp.35-43
• /
• 2024

Numerous methods have been applied to assess the antibacterial effectiveness of hand hygiene products. However, the different results obtained through various evaluation methods have complicated our understanding of the real efficacy of the products. Few studies have compared test methods for assessing the efficacy of hand hygiene products. In particular, reports on ex vivo pig skin testing are limited. This study aimed to compare and characterize the methodologies applied for evaluating hand hygiene products, involving in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo approaches, applicable to both leave-on sanitizers and wash-off products. Our further aim was to enhance the reliability of ex vivo test protocols by identifying influential factors. We performed an in vitro method (EN1276) and an in vivo test (EN1499 and ASTM2755) with at least 20 participants, against Serratia marcescens or Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. For the ex vivo experiment, we used pig skin squares prepared in the same way as those used in the in vivo test method and determined the optimal treated sample volumes for sanitizers and the amount of water required to wash off the product. The hand sanitizers showed at least a 5-log reduction in bacterial load in the in vitro test, while they showed little antibacterial activity in the in vivo and ex vivo tests, particularly those with a low alcohol content. For the hand wash products, the in vitro test was limited because of bubble formation or the high viscosity of the products and it showed low antibacterial activity of less than a 1-log reduction against E. coli. In contrast, significantly higher log reductions were observed in ex vivo and in vivo tests, consistently demonstrating these results across the two methods. Our findings revealed that the ex vivo and in vivo tests reflect the two different antibacterial mechanisms of leave-on and wash-off products. Our proposed optimized ex vivo test was more rapid and more precise than the in vitro test to evaluate antibacterial results.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.38-41
• /
• 2022

Purpose Testosterone is a steroid hormone synthesized by the Leydig cells of the testes in men, and by the adrenal cortex and ovaries in women. Testosterone production is regulated by luteinzing hormone secreted by the anterior pituitary gland. In this experiment, the effectiveness of testosterone radioimmunoassay (RIA) kits produced by three companies was evaluated and compared in case the production of testosterone kits was stopped or supply problems occurred. Materials and Methods In October 2021, samples were collected from the patients (n=49) who requested the testosterone RIA test. The experiment was conducted by dividing the patient's sample into low concentration (1.0 ng/mL or less), medium concentration (2.0-4.0 ng/mL) and high concentration (6.0 ng/mL or more). The Testosterone RIA test compared and evaluated the validity of Company A kits used in this hospital and those of Company B and C used in other hospitals. The precision, sensitivity, recovery, linearity and correlation were evaluated for each kit. The testosterone RIA test was carried out in accordance with the insert kit manual for each manufacturer. Results As a result of measuring the precision of the intra assay, the Coefficient of Variation (CV) value of the company A kit was high at 11.4% only in the low concentration sample, and in the case of the company B and C kits, the CV value was less than 10% at low, medium, and high concentrations. In the inter-assay precision measurement, the CV value was less than 15% in both A and C kits, but in the case of the B kit, the CV value exceeded 15% at low and medium concentrations. Sensitivity was 0.13 ng/mL for company A, 0.01 ng/mL for company B, and 0.01 ng/mL for company C, and the linearity of all three kits showed excellent linearity. In the case of recovery rate, all of the A, B, and C company kits showed results that were out of 90-110%. In the case of correlation test, when compared with the company A kit currently use in here, the correlation coefficient (R²) value for the company B kit was 0.9508, and for the company C kit was 0.9352 Conclusion As a result, there was a slight difference in precision at the low concentration sample. The correlation test showed an excellent correlation coefficient. However, it was difficult to secure samples of various concentrations because there were not many tests of testosterone requested at this hospital. So, additional experiments should be carried out by acquiring samples of various concentrations on each laboratory later.