Cargando…
Review of 16S and ITS Direct Sequencing Results for Clinical Specimens Submitted to a Reference Laboratory
We evaluated the performance of 16S and internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region amplification and sequencing of rDNA from clinical specimens, for the respective detection and identification of bacterial and fungal pathogens. Direct rDNA amplification of 16S and ITS targets from clinical samples was...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4904561/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27366168 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/4210129 |
_version_ | 1782437163621679104 |
---|---|
author | Payne, Michael Azana, Robert Hoang, Linda M. N. |
author_facet | Payne, Michael Azana, Robert Hoang, Linda M. N. |
author_sort | Payne, Michael |
collection | PubMed |
description | We evaluated the performance of 16S and internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region amplification and sequencing of rDNA from clinical specimens, for the respective detection and identification of bacterial and fungal pathogens. Direct rDNA amplification of 16S and ITS targets from clinical samples was performed over a 4-year period and reviewed. All specimens were from sterile sites and submitted to a reference laboratory for evaluation. Results of 16S and ITS were compared to histopathology, Gram and/or calcofluor stain microscopy results. A total of 277 16S tests were performed, with 64 (23%) positive for the presence of bacterial DNA. Identification of an organism was more likely in microscopy positive 16S samples 14/21 (67%), compared to 35/175 (20%) of microscopy negative samples. A total of 110 ITS tests were performed, with 14 (13%) positive. The yield of microscopy positive ITS samples, 9/44 (21%), was higher than microscopy negative samples 3/50 (6%). Given these findings, 16S and ITS are valuable options for culture negative specimens from sterile sites, particularly in the setting of positive microscopy findings. Where microscopy results are negative, the limited sensitivity of 16S and ITS in detecting and identifying an infectious agent needs to be considered. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4904561 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49045612016-06-30 Review of 16S and ITS Direct Sequencing Results for Clinical Specimens Submitted to a Reference Laboratory Payne, Michael Azana, Robert Hoang, Linda M. N. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Research Article We evaluated the performance of 16S and internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region amplification and sequencing of rDNA from clinical specimens, for the respective detection and identification of bacterial and fungal pathogens. Direct rDNA amplification of 16S and ITS targets from clinical samples was performed over a 4-year period and reviewed. All specimens were from sterile sites and submitted to a reference laboratory for evaluation. Results of 16S and ITS were compared to histopathology, Gram and/or calcofluor stain microscopy results. A total of 277 16S tests were performed, with 64 (23%) positive for the presence of bacterial DNA. Identification of an organism was more likely in microscopy positive 16S samples 14/21 (67%), compared to 35/175 (20%) of microscopy negative samples. A total of 110 ITS tests were performed, with 14 (13%) positive. The yield of microscopy positive ITS samples, 9/44 (21%), was higher than microscopy negative samples 3/50 (6%). Given these findings, 16S and ITS are valuable options for culture negative specimens from sterile sites, particularly in the setting of positive microscopy findings. Where microscopy results are negative, the limited sensitivity of 16S and ITS in detecting and identifying an infectious agent needs to be considered. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016 2016-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4904561/ /pubmed/27366168 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/4210129 Text en Copyright © 2016 Michael Payne et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Payne, Michael Azana, Robert Hoang, Linda M. N. Review of 16S and ITS Direct Sequencing Results for Clinical Specimens Submitted to a Reference Laboratory |
title | Review of 16S and ITS Direct Sequencing Results for Clinical Specimens Submitted to a Reference Laboratory |
title_full | Review of 16S and ITS Direct Sequencing Results for Clinical Specimens Submitted to a Reference Laboratory |
title_fullStr | Review of 16S and ITS Direct Sequencing Results for Clinical Specimens Submitted to a Reference Laboratory |
title_full_unstemmed | Review of 16S and ITS Direct Sequencing Results for Clinical Specimens Submitted to a Reference Laboratory |
title_short | Review of 16S and ITS Direct Sequencing Results for Clinical Specimens Submitted to a Reference Laboratory |
title_sort | review of 16s and its direct sequencing results for clinical specimens submitted to a reference laboratory |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4904561/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27366168 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/4210129 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT paynemichael reviewof16sanditsdirectsequencingresultsforclinicalspecimenssubmittedtoareferencelaboratory AT azanarobert reviewof16sanditsdirectsequencingresultsforclinicalspecimenssubmittedtoareferencelaboratory AT hoanglindamn reviewof16sanditsdirectsequencingresultsforclinicalspecimenssubmittedtoareferencelaboratory |