Fractal dimension as a method of evaluating different protocols in the treatment of keratoconjunctivitis sicca in dogs

Submitted by Michele Mologni (mologni@unoeste.br) on 2021-07-02T13:17:45Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Luis Felipe da Costa Zulim.pdf: 1595231 bytes, checksum: ba37209242491287bdf3665f5b70799e (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2021-07-02T13:17:45Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Luis Felipe da Costa Zulim.pdf: 1595231 bytes, checksum: ba37209242491287bdf3665f5b70799e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2020-11-30 keratoconjunctivitis sicca (KCS) is a chronic ophthalmopathy, of immune-mediated origin, commonly diagnosed in dogs and humans. Conventional treatment consists of the use of immunosuppressive eye drops and lubricants, and as an adjunct to oral supplementation of omegas and antioxidants. Recent research points to the use of mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) in several chronic and degenerative diseases, thus being a new alternative for the treatment of KCS due to its capacity for tissue regeneration and immunoregulatory actions. The fractal dimension (FD) calculation has been used in several areas of medicine as an additional, mathematical and quantitative method in the evaluation of complex and irregular structures. The objective of the study was evaluate and to compare different treatment protocols in CCS, using the DF method. In article 1, 210 slides of dogs' palpebral conjunctiva biopsies were evaluated, divided into 7 groups: normal group (healthy eyes), T0 (tacrolimus before treatment), T6 (tacrolimus after treatment), TO0 (tacrolimus associated with oral omega 3 before treatment), TO6 (tacrolimus associated with oral omega 3 after treatment), TOA0 (tacrolimus associated with omega 3 + antioxidants before treatment) and TOA6 (tacrolimus associated with oral omega 3 + antioxidants after treatment). In article 2, 84 histopathological slides divided into 3 groups were evaluated: normal control group (n = 28), group CTM0 at the time of diagnosis CCS (n = 28) and CTM6 after 6 months of treatment with CTM (n = 28). In article 1, the normal group had a higher fractal dimension value than the other groups (1.84 ± 0.04) and the T0 group had a lower value (1.66 ± 0.07). A statistically significant difference was found between all groups (p