Cargando…

Comparison of methods for identifying causative bacterial microorganisms in presumed acute endophthalmitis: conventional culture, blood culture, and PCR

BACKGROUND: Identification of bacterial pathogens in endophthalmitis is important to inform antibiotic selection and treatment decisions. Hemoculture bottles and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis have been proposed to offer good detection sensitivity. This study compared the sensitivity and a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pongsachareonnont, Pear, Honglertnapakul, Worawalun, Chatsuwan, Tanittha
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5320661/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28222703
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-017-2264-5
_version_ 1782509578756292608
author Pongsachareonnont, Pear
Honglertnapakul, Worawalun
Chatsuwan, Tanittha
author_facet Pongsachareonnont, Pear
Honglertnapakul, Worawalun
Chatsuwan, Tanittha
author_sort Pongsachareonnont, Pear
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Identification of bacterial pathogens in endophthalmitis is important to inform antibiotic selection and treatment decisions. Hemoculture bottles and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis have been proposed to offer good detection sensitivity. This study compared the sensitivity and accuracy of a blood culture system, a PCR approach, and conventional culture methods for identification of causative bacteria in cases of acute endophthalmitis. METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with a diagnosis of presumed acute bacterial endophthalmitis who underwent vitreous specimen collection at King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital were enrolled in this study. Forty-one specimens were collected. Each specimen was divided into three parts, and each part was analyzed using one of three microbial identification techniques: conventional plate culture, blood culture, and polymerase chain reaction and sequencing. The results of the three methods were then compared. RESULTS: Bacteria were identified in 15 of the 41 specimens (36.5%). Five (12.2%) specimens were positive by conventional culture methods, 11 (26.8%) were positive by hemoculture, and 11 (26.8%) were positive by PCR. Cohen’s kappa analysis revealed p-values for conventional methods vs. hemoculture, conventional methods vs. PCR, and hemoculture vs. PCR of 0.057, 0.33, and 0.009, respectively. Higher detection rates of Enterococcus faecalis were observed for hemoculture and PCR than for conventional methods. CONCLUSIONS: Blood culture bottles and PCR detection may facilitate bacterial identification in cases of presumed acute endophthalmitis. These techniques should be used in addition to conventional plate culture methods because they provide a greater degree of sensitivity than conventional plate culture alone for the detection of specific microorganisms such as E. faecalis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Thai Clinical Trial Register No. TCTR20110000024.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5320661
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53206612017-02-24 Comparison of methods for identifying causative bacterial microorganisms in presumed acute endophthalmitis: conventional culture, blood culture, and PCR Pongsachareonnont, Pear Honglertnapakul, Worawalun Chatsuwan, Tanittha BMC Infect Dis Research Article BACKGROUND: Identification of bacterial pathogens in endophthalmitis is important to inform antibiotic selection and treatment decisions. Hemoculture bottles and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis have been proposed to offer good detection sensitivity. This study compared the sensitivity and accuracy of a blood culture system, a PCR approach, and conventional culture methods for identification of causative bacteria in cases of acute endophthalmitis. METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with a diagnosis of presumed acute bacterial endophthalmitis who underwent vitreous specimen collection at King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital were enrolled in this study. Forty-one specimens were collected. Each specimen was divided into three parts, and each part was analyzed using one of three microbial identification techniques: conventional plate culture, blood culture, and polymerase chain reaction and sequencing. The results of the three methods were then compared. RESULTS: Bacteria were identified in 15 of the 41 specimens (36.5%). Five (12.2%) specimens were positive by conventional culture methods, 11 (26.8%) were positive by hemoculture, and 11 (26.8%) were positive by PCR. Cohen’s kappa analysis revealed p-values for conventional methods vs. hemoculture, conventional methods vs. PCR, and hemoculture vs. PCR of 0.057, 0.33, and 0.009, respectively. Higher detection rates of Enterococcus faecalis were observed for hemoculture and PCR than for conventional methods. CONCLUSIONS: Blood culture bottles and PCR detection may facilitate bacterial identification in cases of presumed acute endophthalmitis. These techniques should be used in addition to conventional plate culture methods because they provide a greater degree of sensitivity than conventional plate culture alone for the detection of specific microorganisms such as E. faecalis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Thai Clinical Trial Register No. TCTR20110000024. BioMed Central 2017-02-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5320661/ /pubmed/28222703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-017-2264-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pongsachareonnont, Pear
Honglertnapakul, Worawalun
Chatsuwan, Tanittha
Comparison of methods for identifying causative bacterial microorganisms in presumed acute endophthalmitis: conventional culture, blood culture, and PCR
title Comparison of methods for identifying causative bacterial microorganisms in presumed acute endophthalmitis: conventional culture, blood culture, and PCR
title_full Comparison of methods for identifying causative bacterial microorganisms in presumed acute endophthalmitis: conventional culture, blood culture, and PCR
title_fullStr Comparison of methods for identifying causative bacterial microorganisms in presumed acute endophthalmitis: conventional culture, blood culture, and PCR
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of methods for identifying causative bacterial microorganisms in presumed acute endophthalmitis: conventional culture, blood culture, and PCR
title_short Comparison of methods for identifying causative bacterial microorganisms in presumed acute endophthalmitis: conventional culture, blood culture, and PCR
title_sort comparison of methods for identifying causative bacterial microorganisms in presumed acute endophthalmitis: conventional culture, blood culture, and pcr
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5320661/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28222703
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-017-2264-5
work_keys_str_mv AT pongsachareonnontpear comparisonofmethodsforidentifyingcausativebacterialmicroorganismsinpresumedacuteendophthalmitisconventionalculturebloodcultureandpcr
AT honglertnapakulworawalun comparisonofmethodsforidentifyingcausativebacterialmicroorganismsinpresumedacuteendophthalmitisconventionalculturebloodcultureandpcr
AT chatsuwantanittha comparisonofmethodsforidentifyingcausativebacterialmicroorganismsinpresumedacuteendophthalmitisconventionalculturebloodcultureandpcr