...
首页> 外文期刊>Annals of laboratory medicine. >Comparison of Sputum and Nasopharyngeal Swab Specimens for Molecular Diagnosis of Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydophila pneumoniae, and Legionella pneumophila
【24h】

Comparison of Sputum and Nasopharyngeal Swab Specimens for Molecular Diagnosis of Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydophila pneumoniae, and Legionella pneumophila

机译:痰液和鼻咽拭子标本在肺炎支原体,肺炎衣原体和肺炎军团菌的分子诊断中的比较

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: Differentiation of atypical pathogens is important for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). In this study, we compared sputum and nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) for use in detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae (MP), Chlamydophila pneumoniae (CP), and Legionella pneumophila (LP), using Seeplex PneumoBacter ACE Detection Assay (PneumoBacter; Seegene). Methods: Sputum and NPS specimens were collected from patients in 15 hospitals. DNA was extracted from sputum using QIAamp DNA Stool Mini Kit (Qiagen) and from NPS using easyMAG (bioMérieux). Both types of specimens were evaluated by multiplex PCR using PneumoBacter. To determine the diagnostic performance of this assay, sputum samples were also tested using BD ProbeTec ET Atypical Pneumonia Assay (APA; Becton Dickinson). Results: Among 217 sputum and NPS, 20 (9.2%), 2 (0.9%), and 0 sputum were positive for MP, LP, and CP, respectively, whereas 8 (3.7%) NPS were positive for MP. The sputum APA test yielded 186, 206, and 204 interpretable results for MP, LP, and CP, respectively. Of these, 21 (11.3%) were positive for MP, 2 (1.0%) were positive for LP, and 0 samples were positive for CP. Compared to APA, the sensitivity and specificity of the sputum assay for MP were 95.2% and 100.0%, respectively, whereas for the NPS assay, these were 38.1% and 93.9%. Sputum testing was more sensitive than NPS testing (P =0.002). For LP and CP diagnosis, PneumoBacter and APA tests agreed 100%. Conclusions: Specimen type is crucial and sputum is preferred over NPS for simultaneous detection of MP, LP, and CP using multiplex PCR in CAP.
机译:背景:非典型病原体的分化对于社区获得性肺炎(CAP)很重要。在这项研究中,我们使用Seeplex气动细菌ACE检测法(PneumoBacter; Seegene),比较了痰和鼻咽拭子(NPS)用于检测肺炎支原体(MP),肺炎衣原体(CP)和肺炎军团菌(LP)的情况。方法:从15家医院的患者中收集痰液和NPS标本。使用QIAamp DNA Stool Mini Kit(Qiagen)从痰液中提取DNA,并使用easyMAG(bioMérieux)从NPS中提取DNA。两种类型的标本均使用PneumoBacter通过多重PCR进行了评估。为了确定该测定法的诊断性能,还使用BD ProbeTec ET非典型肺炎测定法(APA; Becton Dickinson)对痰液样本进行了测试。结果:在217个痰和NPS中,MP,LP和CP分别为20个(9.2%),2个(0.9%)和0个痰阳性,而MP中NPS阳性的为8个(3.7%)。痰APA测试分别对MP,LP和CP产生186、206和204的可解释结果。其中,MP阳性21例(11.3%),LP阳性2例(1.0%),CP阳性0例。与APA相比,痰检的MP敏感性和特异性分别为95.2%和100.0%,而NPS检痰的敏感性和特异性分别为38.1%和93.9%。痰液检测比NPS检测更敏感(P = 0.002)。对于LP和CP诊断,PneumoBacter和AP​​A测试同意100%。结论:标本类型至关重要,并且在CAP中使用多重PCR同时检测MP,LP和CP时,痰液优于NPS。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号