Browsing by Author "Celik, Betul"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Molecular Epidemiological Analysis of Bacillus Pseudo-Outbreak due to Contaminated Culture Tubes Containing Stuart Medium
(2022) Asgin, Nergis; Kal-Cakmakliogullari, Elcin; Otlu, Baris; Ersoy, Omer F.; Celik, Betul; Basustaoglu, Ahmet; 35023676
Background: It is challenging to determine whether Bacillus species other than Bacillus anthracis cause infections. Pseudo and true outbreaks of Bacillus spp. have been noted. Here, we present a molecular analysis of a Bacillus spp. pseudo-outbreak caused by contaminated culture tubes containing Stuart medium. Methods: Between January and March 2015, a high percentage of Bacillus spp. was isolated from the wound samples of inpatients at the Karabuk University Hospital, and an outbreak was suspected. Environmental and staff nasal samples were cultured aerobically, and Bacillus spp. were isolated from some of them. However, the isolation of Bacillus spp. in throat cultures of outpatients suggested contamination caused by culture tubes containing Stuart medium. We examined two lots of culture tubes used in the hospital. Although the culture tubes' expiry date and storage conditions were suitable, Bacillus spp. grew in one of these lots. A total of 47 Bacillus spp. isolated during this period were identified, and the clonal relationship among the isolates was investigated by arbitrarily primed polymerase chain reaction. Results: Twenty-seven strains were identified as Bacillus megaterium and 20 as Bacillus firmus. Of the four strains isolated from the Stuart medium, two were identified as B. firmus and the other two were B. megaterium. Two B. firmus strains isolated from the Stuart medium and two B. firmus strains obtained from the coronary intensive care environmental samples were matched and clustered within the same genotype. We recalled all culture tubes containing Stuart medium. After another brand's culture tubes were distributed, no growth was observed. It was then understood that the pseudo-outbreak source was contaminated culture tubes containing Stuart medium. Conclusions: Microbiological controls of medical materials and equipment should be regularly checked to prevent outbreaks (true or pseudo).
A Retrospective Evaluation of the Epithelial Changes/Lesions and Neoplasms of the Gallbladder in Turkey and a Review of the Existing Sampling Methods: A Multicentre Study
(2018) Ozgun, Gonca; Esendaglı, Guldal; Akarca, F. Goknur; Balci, Serdar; Argon, Asuman; Sengiz Erhan, Selma; Turhan, Nesrin; Ince Zengin, Neslihan; Hallac Keser, Sevinc; Celik, Betul; Bulut, Tangul; Abdullazade, Samir; Erden, Esra; Savas, Berna; Bostan, Temmuz; Sagol, Ozgul; Aysal Agalar, Anil; Kepil, Nuray; Karslioglu, Yildirim; Gunal, Armagan; Markoc, Fatma; Saka, Burcu; Ozdamar, Sukru Oguz; Bahadir, Burak; Kaymaz, Esin; Isik, Emre; Ayhan, Semin; Tuncel, Deniz; Ozguven Yilmaz, Banu; Celik, Sevinc; Karabacak, Tuba; Erbarut Seven, Ipek; Ataizi Celikel, Cigdem; Gucin, Zuhal; Ekinci, Ozgur; Akyol, Gulen; 28984336
Objective: As there is continuing disagreement among the observers on the differential diagnosis between the epithelial changes/lesions and neoplasms of the gallbladder, this multicentre study was planned in order to assess the rate of the epithelial gallbladder lesions in Turkey and to propose microscopy and macroscopy protocols. Material and Method: With the participation of 22 institutions around Turkey that were included in the Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Study Group, 89,324 cholecystectomy specimens sampled from 2003 to 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. The numbers of adenocarcinomas, dysplasias, intracholecystic neoplasms/adenomas, intestinal metaplasias and reactive atypia were identified with the review of pathology reports and the regional and countrywide incidence rates were presented in percentages. Results: Epithelial changes/lesions were reported in 6% of cholecystectomy materials. Of these epithelial lesions, 7% were reported as adenocarcinoma, 0.9% as high-grade dysplasia, 4% as low-grade dysplasia, 7.8% as reactive/regenerative atypia, 1.7% as neoplastic polyp, and 15.6% as intestinal metaplasia. The remaining lesions (63%) primarily included non-neoplastic polypoids/hyperplastic lesions and antral/pyloric metaplasia. There were also differences between pathology laboratories. Conclusion: The major causes of the difference in reporting these epithelial changes/lesions and neoplasms include the differences related to the institute's oncological surgery frequency, sampling protocols, geographical dissimilarities, and differences in the diagnoses/interpretations of the pathologists. It seems that the diagnosis may change if new sections are taken from the specimen when any epithelial abnormality is seen during microscopic examination of the cholecystectomy materials.