Cargando…

Performance of pyrosequencing versus MALDI-TOF MS in bacteria identification in chronic lung disease

Rapid identification of the etiological agent in bacterial infection is necessary for correct diagnosis and appropriate therapy. In general, identification of pure cultures of bacteria using conventional phenotyping techniques requires 4-24 hours. Recently available new molecular technologies offer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Navrátilová, Lucie, Procházková, Petra, Bardoň, Jan, Novotný, Radko, Zápalka, Martin, Jakubec, Petr, Zatloukal, Jaromír, Kolek, Vítězslav, Kopřiva, František, Flodrová, Pavla, Raclavský, Vladislav
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: jbm 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6706111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31453216
http://dx.doi.org/10.14440/jbm.2016.125
_version_ 1783445652180566016
author Navrátilová, Lucie
Procházková, Petra
Bardoň, Jan
Novotný, Radko
Zápalka, Martin
Jakubec, Petr
Zatloukal, Jaromír
Kolek, Vítězslav
Kopřiva, František
Flodrová, Pavla
Raclavský, Vladislav
author_facet Navrátilová, Lucie
Procházková, Petra
Bardoň, Jan
Novotný, Radko
Zápalka, Martin
Jakubec, Petr
Zatloukal, Jaromír
Kolek, Vítězslav
Kopřiva, František
Flodrová, Pavla
Raclavský, Vladislav
author_sort Navrátilová, Lucie
collection PubMed
description Rapid identification of the etiological agent in bacterial infection is necessary for correct diagnosis and appropriate therapy. In general, identification of pure cultures of bacteria using conventional phenotyping techniques requires 4-24 hours. Recently available new molecular technologies offer the potential of same day species identification once pure culture is available. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of rDNA V1 hypervariable region pyrosequencing, and the whole cell MALDI-TOF MS protein profiling in routine species identification. During the period from June 2012 to June 2014, 1.140 pure culture isolates were recovered from 402 samples from 126 patients suffering cystic fibrosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or bronchiectasis. All the isolates were subjected to species identification by both techniques. Unfortunately, pyrosequencing was able to reach the species level in 43.2% of isolates only, whereas MALDI-TOF was clearly superior with 96.8% respectively. The overall sensitivity values also clearly underlined the superiority of MALDI-TOF MS with 96.8% compared to 85.1% achieved by pyrosequencing. Generally, MALDI-TOF MS turned out to be the best suitable technique in routine bacterial identification, whereas pyrosequencing could be recommended as the method of choice particularly in situations where MALDI-TOF MS fails to identify rare species.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6706111
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher jbm
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67061112019-08-26 Performance of pyrosequencing versus MALDI-TOF MS in bacteria identification in chronic lung disease Navrátilová, Lucie Procházková, Petra Bardoň, Jan Novotný, Radko Zápalka, Martin Jakubec, Petr Zatloukal, Jaromír Kolek, Vítězslav Kopřiva, František Flodrová, Pavla Raclavský, Vladislav J Biol Methods Benchmark Rapid identification of the etiological agent in bacterial infection is necessary for correct diagnosis and appropriate therapy. In general, identification of pure cultures of bacteria using conventional phenotyping techniques requires 4-24 hours. Recently available new molecular technologies offer the potential of same day species identification once pure culture is available. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of rDNA V1 hypervariable region pyrosequencing, and the whole cell MALDI-TOF MS protein profiling in routine species identification. During the period from June 2012 to June 2014, 1.140 pure culture isolates were recovered from 402 samples from 126 patients suffering cystic fibrosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or bronchiectasis. All the isolates were subjected to species identification by both techniques. Unfortunately, pyrosequencing was able to reach the species level in 43.2% of isolates only, whereas MALDI-TOF was clearly superior with 96.8% respectively. The overall sensitivity values also clearly underlined the superiority of MALDI-TOF MS with 96.8% compared to 85.1% achieved by pyrosequencing. Generally, MALDI-TOF MS turned out to be the best suitable technique in routine bacterial identification, whereas pyrosequencing could be recommended as the method of choice particularly in situations where MALDI-TOF MS fails to identify rare species. jbm 2016-08-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6706111/ /pubmed/31453216 http://dx.doi.org/10.14440/jbm.2016.125 Text en This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0) .
spellingShingle Benchmark
Navrátilová, Lucie
Procházková, Petra
Bardoň, Jan
Novotný, Radko
Zápalka, Martin
Jakubec, Petr
Zatloukal, Jaromír
Kolek, Vítězslav
Kopřiva, František
Flodrová, Pavla
Raclavský, Vladislav
Performance of pyrosequencing versus MALDI-TOF MS in bacteria identification in chronic lung disease
title Performance of pyrosequencing versus MALDI-TOF MS in bacteria identification in chronic lung disease
title_full Performance of pyrosequencing versus MALDI-TOF MS in bacteria identification in chronic lung disease
title_fullStr Performance of pyrosequencing versus MALDI-TOF MS in bacteria identification in chronic lung disease
title_full_unstemmed Performance of pyrosequencing versus MALDI-TOF MS in bacteria identification in chronic lung disease
title_short Performance of pyrosequencing versus MALDI-TOF MS in bacteria identification in chronic lung disease
title_sort performance of pyrosequencing versus maldi-tof ms in bacteria identification in chronic lung disease
topic Benchmark
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6706111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31453216
http://dx.doi.org/10.14440/jbm.2016.125
work_keys_str_mv AT navratilovalucie performanceofpyrosequencingversusmalditofmsinbacteriaidentificationinchroniclungdisease
AT prochazkovapetra performanceofpyrosequencingversusmalditofmsinbacteriaidentificationinchroniclungdisease
AT bardonjan performanceofpyrosequencingversusmalditofmsinbacteriaidentificationinchroniclungdisease
AT novotnyradko performanceofpyrosequencingversusmalditofmsinbacteriaidentificationinchroniclungdisease
AT zapalkamartin performanceofpyrosequencingversusmalditofmsinbacteriaidentificationinchroniclungdisease
AT jakubecpetr performanceofpyrosequencingversusmalditofmsinbacteriaidentificationinchroniclungdisease
AT zatloukaljaromir performanceofpyrosequencingversusmalditofmsinbacteriaidentificationinchroniclungdisease
AT kolekvitezslav performanceofpyrosequencingversusmalditofmsinbacteriaidentificationinchroniclungdisease
AT koprivafrantisek performanceofpyrosequencingversusmalditofmsinbacteriaidentificationinchroniclungdisease
AT flodrovapavla performanceofpyrosequencingversusmalditofmsinbacteriaidentificationinchroniclungdisease
AT raclavskyvladislav performanceofpyrosequencingversusmalditofmsinbacteriaidentificationinchroniclungdisease