RESUMEN
In this study, the phenolic components, as well as the antioxidant and antimicrobial activities, of the ripe and unripe fruit of pawpaw (Asimina triloba [L.] Dunal) extracted using five different solvents (distilled water, 95% methanol, 80% methanol, 95% ethanol, and 80% ethanol) were analyzed. The total phenolic content and total flavonoid content were the highest in the 95% ethanol (149.50 mg CAE/g) and 80% ethanol (5.62 mg RE/g) extracts of the unripe fruit, respectively. Analysis of 17 phenolic compounds in pawpaw extracts revealed that epigallocatechin, epicatechin, and p-coumaric acid were the as major compounds, and the amounts of all components significantly decreased with the ripening (P < 0.05). In all antioxidant assays, the 95% ethanol extract of the unripe fruit showed the highest antioxidant activity (EC50 0.22 to 0.93 mg/mL). The pawpaw extracts were more sensitive against Corynebacterium xerosis and Clostridium perfringens. In particular, the 95% ethanol extract of the ripe fruit notably inhibited C. xerosis growth, with minimum inhibitory concentration of 1.56 mg/mL. These results showed that the unripe fruit of pawpaw has abundant phenolic compounds and superior antioxidant activity, and that the 95% ethanol extract of the ripe fruit shows strong inhibitory activity against various microorganisms. Therefore, pawpaw fruit can be utilized as an attractive source of nutrients and therapeutic agents. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: In this study, we identified that the unripe fruit of pawpaw is rich in phenolic compounds and shows strong antioxidant activities. The 95% ethanol extract of the ripe fruit showed strong high inhibitory effect against various microorganisms. These results suggest that pawpaw fruit can serve as a source of antioxidants and delay the aging process. In addition, the fruit could also potentially be utilized as a potential antimicrobial agent.
Asunto(s)
Antiinfecciosos/análisis , Antioxidantes/análisis , Asimina/química , Frutas/química , Fenoles/análisis , Bacterias/efectos de los fármacos , Clostridium perfringens/efectos de los fármacos , Corynebacterium/efectos de los fármacos , Flavonoides/análisis , Hongos/efectos de los fármacos , Pruebas de Sensibilidad Microbiana , Extractos Vegetales/análisisRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Enzyme immunoassay (EIA) capable of detecting both toxin A and toxin B is strongly recommended for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile associated disease. Therefore, we evaluated two different EIAs for the detection of C. difficile toxin A/B. METHODS: For a total of 228 stool specimens we performed bacteriologic cultures for C. difficile and examined for toxin A and toxin B using enzyme linked fluorescent immunoassay (ELFA; VIDAS CDAB, Bio-Merieux sa, France) and ELISA (C.DIFFICILE TOX A/B II, TECHLAB, USA). We also performed PCR assays for toxin A and B genes in 117 C. difficile isolates that grew from the stool cultures and compared the results with those obtained with the two different EIAs. RESULTS: The concordance rate between ELFA and ELISA was 85.5% (195/228). Using the culture and PCR results as the standard, the sensitivity/specificity of the ELFA and ELISA were 65.0%/72.1% and 71.8%/70.3%, and for positive/negative predictive values were 78.4%/69.6% and 71.8%/70.3%, respectively (P value >0.05). No differences were observed between the results of ELFA and ELISA with toxin A(-) toxin B(+) strains of C. difficile. CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of the ELISA was slightly higher than that of ELFA for toxin A and toxin B, but the specificity and positive predictive value of the ELFA were rather higher than those of the ELISA, although no statistical differences were observed. A bacteriologic culture and PCR assay for toxin genes are recommended in case the both EIAs are negative.
Asunto(s)
Proteínas Bacterianas/análisis , Toxinas Bacterianas/análisis , Clostridioides difficile/metabolismo , Enterotoxinas/análisis , Ensayo de Inmunoadsorción Enzimática/métodos , Proteínas Bacterianas/genética , Proteínas Bacterianas/inmunología , Toxinas Bacterianas/genética , Toxinas Bacterianas/inmunología , Clostridioides difficile/genética , Clostridioides difficile/aislamiento & purificación , Enterotoxinas/genética , Enterotoxinas/inmunología , Heces/microbiología , Colorantes Fluorescentes/química , Humanos , Juego de Reactivos para DiagnósticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile is one of the most important pathogens responsible for nosocomial diarrhea. The disease is mediated by two toxins, designated as A and B; therefore, identification of the toxins is important for diagnosis. However, culture or cytotoxin assay are not easily done because of tedious procedures. Instead, toxin A immunoassay is widely used. We evaluated two different enzyme immunoassays (EIA) for C. difficile toxin A and compared them with culture and PCR results. METHODS: A total of 65 stool specimens were examined for toxin A using enzyme linked fluorescent immunoassay (ELFA, VIDAS CD II, Bio-Merieux, France) and enzyme linked immunosolvent assay (ELISA, C.DIFFICILE TOX A II, TECHLAB, USA ) and were also cultured for C. difficile using cycloserine cefoxitine fructose agar. We amplified toxin A and B genes using primers NK9-NK 11 and NK104-NK105, respectively, in 23 C. difficile isolates. RESULTS: The concordance rate between ELFA and ELISA was 76.9%. The sensitivity and specificity of the ELFA and ELISA based on the culture and PCR results for toxin A gene were 84.6%/98.1% and 84.6%/67.3%. Positive and negative predictive values were 91%/96.2% in VIDAS and 78.0%/ 94.6% in TECHLAB. The positive rates of toxin B genes were 100%, 83.3% and 50% in toxin A positive, variant and negative strains, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivities of the ELFA and ELISA for toxin A were the same, but specificity and positive predictive value of the ELFA were higher than those of the ELISA. PCR or EIA method detecting both toxin A and toxin B is strongly recommended, because the variant strains (toxin A negative and toxin B positive) of C. difficile may be more prevalent than were anticipated in Korea.