Cargando…

Microbiological Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis: An Overview

Brucella spp. are Gram-negative, non-motile, non-spore-forming, slow-growing, facultative intracellular bacteria causing brucellosis. Brucellosis is an endemic of specific geographic areas and, although underreported, represents the most common zoonotic infection, with an annual global incidence of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Di Bonaventura, Giovanni, Angeletti, Silvia, Ianni, Andrea, Petitti, Tommasangelo, Gherardi, Giovanni
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8709366/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34959578
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10121623
_version_ 1784622917373394944
author Di Bonaventura, Giovanni
Angeletti, Silvia
Ianni, Andrea
Petitti, Tommasangelo
Gherardi, Giovanni
author_facet Di Bonaventura, Giovanni
Angeletti, Silvia
Ianni, Andrea
Petitti, Tommasangelo
Gherardi, Giovanni
author_sort Di Bonaventura, Giovanni
collection PubMed
description Brucella spp. are Gram-negative, non-motile, non-spore-forming, slow-growing, facultative intracellular bacteria causing brucellosis. Brucellosis is an endemic of specific geographic areas and, although underreported, represents the most common zoonotic infection, with an annual global incidence of 500,000 cases among humans. Humans represent an occasional host where the infection is mainly caused by B. melitensis, which is the most virulent; B. abortus; B. suis; and B. canis. A microbiological analysis is crucial to identifying human cases because clinical symptoms of human brucellosis are variable and aspecific. The laboratory diagnosis is based on three different microbiological approaches: (i) direct diagnosis by culture, (ii) indirect diagnosis by serological tests, and (iii) direct rapid diagnosis by molecular PCR-based methods. Despite the established experience with serological tests and highly sensitive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs), a culture is still considered the “gold standard” in the laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis due to its clinical and epidemiological relevance. Moreover, the automated BC systems now available have increased the sensitivity of BCs and shortened the time to detection of Brucella species. The main limitations of serological tests are the lack of common interpretative criteria, the suboptimal specificity due to interspecies cross-reactivity, and the low sensitivity during the early stage of disease. Despite that, serological tests remain the main diagnostic tool, especially in endemic areas because they are inexpensive, user friendly, and have high negative predictive value. Promising serological tests based on new synthetic antigens have been recently developed together with novel point-of-care tests without the need for dedicated equipment and expertise. NAATs are rapid tests that can help diagnose brucellosis in a few hours with high sensitivity and specificity. Nevertheless, the interpretation of NAAT-positive results requires attention because it may not necessarily indicate an active infection but rather a low bacterial inoculum, DNA from dead bacteria, or a patient that has recovered. Refined NAATs should be developed, and their performances should be compared with those of commercial and home-made molecular tests before being commercialized for the diagnosis of brucellosis. Here, we review and report the most common and updated microbiological diagnostic methods currently available for the laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8709366
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87093662021-12-25 Microbiological Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis: An Overview Di Bonaventura, Giovanni Angeletti, Silvia Ianni, Andrea Petitti, Tommasangelo Gherardi, Giovanni Pathogens Review Brucella spp. are Gram-negative, non-motile, non-spore-forming, slow-growing, facultative intracellular bacteria causing brucellosis. Brucellosis is an endemic of specific geographic areas and, although underreported, represents the most common zoonotic infection, with an annual global incidence of 500,000 cases among humans. Humans represent an occasional host where the infection is mainly caused by B. melitensis, which is the most virulent; B. abortus; B. suis; and B. canis. A microbiological analysis is crucial to identifying human cases because clinical symptoms of human brucellosis are variable and aspecific. The laboratory diagnosis is based on three different microbiological approaches: (i) direct diagnosis by culture, (ii) indirect diagnosis by serological tests, and (iii) direct rapid diagnosis by molecular PCR-based methods. Despite the established experience with serological tests and highly sensitive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs), a culture is still considered the “gold standard” in the laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis due to its clinical and epidemiological relevance. Moreover, the automated BC systems now available have increased the sensitivity of BCs and shortened the time to detection of Brucella species. The main limitations of serological tests are the lack of common interpretative criteria, the suboptimal specificity due to interspecies cross-reactivity, and the low sensitivity during the early stage of disease. Despite that, serological tests remain the main diagnostic tool, especially in endemic areas because they are inexpensive, user friendly, and have high negative predictive value. Promising serological tests based on new synthetic antigens have been recently developed together with novel point-of-care tests without the need for dedicated equipment and expertise. NAATs are rapid tests that can help diagnose brucellosis in a few hours with high sensitivity and specificity. Nevertheless, the interpretation of NAAT-positive results requires attention because it may not necessarily indicate an active infection but rather a low bacterial inoculum, DNA from dead bacteria, or a patient that has recovered. Refined NAATs should be developed, and their performances should be compared with those of commercial and home-made molecular tests before being commercialized for the diagnosis of brucellosis. Here, we review and report the most common and updated microbiological diagnostic methods currently available for the laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis. MDPI 2021-12-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8709366/ /pubmed/34959578 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10121623 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Di Bonaventura, Giovanni
Angeletti, Silvia
Ianni, Andrea
Petitti, Tommasangelo
Gherardi, Giovanni
Microbiological Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis: An Overview
title Microbiological Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis: An Overview
title_full Microbiological Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis: An Overview
title_fullStr Microbiological Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis: An Overview
title_full_unstemmed Microbiological Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis: An Overview
title_short Microbiological Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis: An Overview
title_sort microbiological laboratory diagnosis of human brucellosis: an overview
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8709366/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34959578
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10121623
work_keys_str_mv AT dibonaventuragiovanni microbiologicallaboratorydiagnosisofhumanbrucellosisanoverview
AT angelettisilvia microbiologicallaboratorydiagnosisofhumanbrucellosisanoverview
AT ianniandrea microbiologicallaboratorydiagnosisofhumanbrucellosisanoverview
AT petittitommasangelo microbiologicallaboratorydiagnosisofhumanbrucellosisanoverview
AT gherardigiovanni microbiologicallaboratorydiagnosisofhumanbrucellosisanoverview