Abstract
BACKGROUND: Polyvalent bacterial lysate (PBL) is an oral immunostimulating vaccine consisting of bacterial standardized lysates obtained by lysis of different strains of bacteria. Autovaccines are individually prepared based on the results of smears obtained from the patient. Both types of vaccine can be used to treat an ongoing chronic infection. This study sought to determine which method is more effective against nasal colonization by potential respiratory tract pathogens. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We enrolled 150 patients with aerobic Gram stain culture and count results indicating bacterial colonization of the nose and/or throat by potential pathogens. The participants were randomly assigned to each of the following groups: 1. administration of PBL, 2. administration of autovaccine, and 3. no intervention (controls). RESULTS: Reduction of the bacterial count in Streptococcus pneumoniae-colonized participants was significant after the autovaccine (p<0.001) and PBL (p<0.01). Reduction of the bacterial count of other β-hemolytic streptococcal strains after treatment with the autovaccine was significant (p<0.01) and was non-significant after PBL. In Haemophilus influenzae colonization, significant reduction in the bacterial count was noted in the PBL group (p<0.01). Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization did not respond to either treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The autovaccine is more effective than PBL for reducing bacterial count of Streptococcus pneumoniae and β-hemolytic streptococci, while PBL was more effective against Haemophilus influenzae colonization.