Department of Pediatrics, Anna Meyer Children's Hospital and University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
PLoS One. 2010 Feb 19;5(2):e9282. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009282.
Pneumococcal serotyping is usually performed by Quellung reaction, considered the gold standard test. However the method cannot be used on culture-negative samples. Molecular methods can be a useful alternative. The aim of the study was to evaluate the use of Multiplex-sequential-PCR (MS-PCR) or Realtime-PCR on blood samples for diagnosis and serotyping of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) in a pediatric clinical setting.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Sensitivity and specificity of MS-PCR and Realtime-PCR have been evaluated both on 46 well characterized pneumococcal isolates and on 67 clinical samples from children with culture-negative IPD. No difference in sensitivity and specificity between MS-PCR and Realtime PCR was found when the methods were used on isolates: both methods could type 100% isolates and the results were always consistent with culture-based methods. On the contrary, when used on clinical samples 43/67 (64.2%) were typeable by MS-PCR and 61/67 (91.0%) by Realtime-PCR (p = 0.0004,K Cohen 0.3, McNemar's p<0.001). Non-typeability by MS-PCR was associated in 18/20 cases (90.0%) with low bacterial load. The difference between the two methods was present both when they were used on normally sterile fluids (respectively 31/33 (93.9%) typeable samples for Realtime-PCR and 24/33 (72.7%) for MS-PCR, p = 0.047, 95%CL 0.03-0.98; K Cohen 0.3; McNemar's p = 0.0016) and when they were used on nasopharyngeal swabs (respectively 30/34 (88.2%) typeable samples for Realtime-PCR and 19/34 (55.9%) for MS-PCR, p = 0.007, 95%CL 0.04-0.66); the presence of multiple pneumococcal serotypes in nasopharyngeal swabs was found more frequently by Realtime PCR (19/30; 63.3%) than by Multiplex-sequential PCR (3/19; 15.8%; p = 0.003;95%CL 1.87-39.97).
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: In conclusion, both MS-PCR and Realtime PCR can be used for pneumococcal serotyping of most serotypes/serogroups directly on clinical samples from culture-negative patients but Realtime-PCR appears more sensitive.
肺炎球菌血清分型通常通过胶乳增强反应进行,被认为是金标准检测方法。然而,该方法不能用于培养阴性样本。分子方法可能是一种有用的替代方法。本研究旨在评估多重序列-PCR(MS-PCR)或实时 PCR 用于血液样本中儿童侵袭性肺炎球菌病(IPD)的诊断和血清分型。
方法/主要发现:MS-PCR 和 Realtime-PCR 的敏感性和特异性已在 46 株特征明确的肺炎球菌分离株和 67 例培养阴性 IPD 患儿的临床样本上进行了评估。当在分离株上使用这些方法时,MS-PCR 和 Realtime-PCR 的敏感性和特异性无差异:两种方法均可对 100%的分离株进行分型,结果始终与基于培养的方法一致。相反,当在临床样本上使用时,43/67(64.2%)可通过 MS-PCR 进行分型,61/67(91.0%)可通过 Realtime-PCR 进行分型(p=0.0004,K 科恩 0.3,McNemar's p<0.001)。20 例(90.0%)非 MS-PCR 可分型病例与细菌载量低有关。两种方法之间的差异均存在于正常无菌液中(分别为 Realtime-PCR 33/33(93.9%)可分型样本和 MS-PCR 24/33(72.7%)可分型样本,p=0.047,95%置信区间 0.03-0.98;K 科恩 0.3;McNemar's p=0.0016)和鼻咽拭子(分别为 Realtime-PCR 34/34(88.2%)可分型样本和 MS-PCR 19/34(55.9%)可分型样本,p=0.007,95%置信区间 0.04-0.66);鼻咽拭子中发现多种肺炎球菌血清型的情况更为常见 Realtime-PCR(19/30;63.3%)比 Multiplex-sequential PCR(3/19;15.8%;p=0.003;95%置信区间 1.87-39.97)。
总之,MS-PCR 和 Realtime-PCR 均可直接从培养阴性患者的临床样本中对大多数血清型/血清群进行肺炎球菌血清分型,但 Realtime-PCR 似乎更敏感。