Sugimoto Mitsushige, Wu Jeng-Yih, Abudayyeh Suhaib, Hoffman Jill, Brahem Hajer, Al-Khatib Khaldun, Yamaoka Yoshio, Graham David Y
Department of Medicine, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas 77030, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 2009 Mar;47(3):738-42. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01563-08. Epub 2009 Jan 7.
The aim of this study was to compare published Helicobacter pylori primer pairs for their ability to reliably detect H. pylori in gastric biopsy specimens and salivary samples. Detection limits of the 26 PCR primer pairs previously described for detection of H. pylori DNA in clinical samples were determined. Sensitivity and specificity were determined using primers with detection limits of <100 CFU/ml using 50 H. pylori-positive and -negative (by concordance by culture and histology) coded gastric biopsy specimens. These results were then confirmed with gastric biopsy specimens and saliva from patients with confirmed H. pylori status. Five of the twenty-six previously reported primer pairs (HP64-f/HP64-r, HP1/HP2, EHC-U/EHC-L, VAG-F/VAG-R, and ICT37/ICT38) had detection limits of <100 CFU/ml in the presence of gastric tissue. None had 100% specificity or sensitivity; all produced false-positive results. The HP64-f/HP64-r for ureA and HP1/HP2 for 16S rRNA individually had sensitivities and specificities of >90% with gastric biopsy specimens. No combinations of primer pairs improved the results. Using these five primer pairs, 54% of the positive saliva samples were determined to be false positive; both the HP64-f/HP64-r and the HP1/HP2 sets produced false positives with saliva. We conclude that clinicians should not rely on results using current PCR primers alone to decide the H. pylori status of an individual patient or as a basis for treatment decisions. The results of studies based on PCR identification of H. pylori in environmental samples should be viewed with caution. Possibly, specific primers sets can be identified based on the presence of multiple putative virulence factor genes.
本研究的目的是比较已发表的幽门螺杆菌引物对在可靠检测胃活检标本和唾液样本中幽门螺杆菌方面的能力。确定了先前描述的用于检测临床样本中幽门螺杆菌DNA的26对PCR引物的检测限。使用检测限<100 CFU/ml的引物,对50份幽门螺杆菌阳性和阴性(通过培养和组织学一致性判断)的编码胃活检标本进行检测,以确定敏感性和特异性。然后用确诊幽门螺杆菌状态患者的胃活检标本和唾液对这些结果进行确认。先前报道的26对引物中有5对(HP64-f/HP64-r、HP1/HP2、EHC-U/EHC-L、VAG-F/VAG-R和ICT37/ICT38)在有胃组织存在的情况下检测限<100 CFU/ml。没有一对引物具有100%的特异性或敏感性;均产生了假阳性结果。用于ureA的HP64-f/HP64-r和用于16S rRNA的HP1/HP2单独对胃活检标本的敏感性和特异性均>90%。引物对的组合均未改善结果。使用这5对引物时,54%的阳性唾液样本被判定为假阳性;HP64-f/HP64-r和HP1/HP2两组引物对唾液均产生了假阳性。我们得出结论,临床医生不应仅依赖当前PCR引物的结果来判定个体患者的幽门螺杆菌状态或作为治疗决策的依据。基于PCR鉴定环境样本中幽门螺杆菌的研究结果应谨慎看待。可能可以基于多个假定毒力因子基因的存在来鉴定特定的引物组。