Cargando…
Comparative Evaluation Between the RealStar Pneumocystis jirovecii PCR Kit and the AmpliSens Pneumocystis jirovecii (carinii)-FRT PCR Kit for Detecting P. jirovecii in Non-HIV Immunocompromised Patients
BACKGROUND: Real-time PCR is more sensitive than microscopic examination for detecting Pneumocystis jirovecii. We compared the performance of two assays for detecting P. jirovecii DNA: the RealStar Pneumocystis jirovecii PCR Kit 1.0 CE (Altona Diagnostics, Hamburg, Germany) and the AmpliSens Pneumoc...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6240529/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30430780 http://dx.doi.org/10.3343/alm.2019.39.2.176 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Real-time PCR is more sensitive than microscopic examination for detecting Pneumocystis jirovecii. We compared the performance of two assays for detecting P. jirovecii DNA: the RealStar Pneumocystis jirovecii PCR Kit 1.0 CE (Altona Diagnostics, Hamburg, Germany) and the AmpliSens Pneumocystis jirovecii (carinii)-FRT PCR kit (InterLabService Ltd., Moscow, Russia). METHODS: We used 159 samples from the lower respiratory tract (112 bronchoalveolar lavage [BAL] fluid, 37 sputum, and 10 endotracheal aspirate [ETA] samples) of non-HIV immunocompromised patients. Nested PCR and sequencing were used to resolve discordant results. The performance of the two assays was evaluated according to clinical categories (clinical Pneumocystis pneumonia [PCP], possible PCP, or unlikely PCP) based on clinical and radiological observations. RESULTS: The positive and negative percent agreement values were 100% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.4–100%) and 96.6% (95% CI, 90.9–98.9%), respectively, and kappa was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.84–0.99). P. jirovecii DNA load was significantly higher in the clinical PCP group than in the other groups (P<0.05). When stratified by sample type, the positive rate for BAL fluids from the clinical PCP group was 100% using either assay, whereas the positive rate for sputum/ETA samples was only 20%. CONCLUSIONS: The two assays showed similar diagnostic performance and detected low P. jirovecii burden in BAL fluids. Both assays may be useful as routine methods for detecting P. jirovecii DNA in a clinical laboratory setting, though their results should be interpreted considering sample type. |
---|