BACKGROUND: The Liverpool epidemic strain (LES) of Pseudomonas aeruginosa is widespread among patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) in specialist centers around Liverpool and elsewhere in the UK. This study evaluates a new diagnostic PCR assay based on a unique DNA sequence (PS21) of LES, for its identification of colonies directly from sputum. METHODS: One hundred and fifty-eight sputum samples from 92 patients were cultured and P. aeruginosa isolates were typed by PS21 PCR and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). Subsequently, PS21 PCR was performed directly on sputum and the results were compared with culture, PFGE, and PS21 PCR typing. RESULTS: Eighty patients were colonized with P. aeruginosa, 63 by LES (79%). There was 100% concordance between PS21 PCR on colonies and PFGE typing. The sensitivity and specificity of PS21 PCR directly on sputum was 98.2% and 93.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that PS21 PCR can be used for simple and rapid screening of LES colonization in CF patients.
BACKGROUND: The Liverpool epidemic strain (LES) of Pseudomonas aeruginosa is widespread among patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) in specialist centers around Liverpool and elsewhere in the UK. This study evaluates a new diagnostic PCR assay based on a unique DNA sequence (PS21) of LES, for its identification of colonies directly from sputum. METHODS: One hundred and fifty-eight sputum samples from 92 patients were cultured and P. aeruginosa isolates were typed by PS21 PCR and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). Subsequently, PS21 PCR was performed directly on sputum and the results were compared with culture, PFGE, and PS21 PCR typing. RESULTS: Eighty patients were colonized with P. aeruginosa, 63 by LES (79%). There was 100% concordance between PS21 PCR on colonies and PFGE typing. The sensitivity and specificity of PS21 PCR directly on sputum was 98.2% and 93.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that PS21 PCR can be used for simple and rapid screening of LES colonization in CFpatients.
Authors: A McDowell; E Mahenthiralingam; J E Moore; K E Dunbar; A K Webb; M E Dodd; S L Martin; B C Millar; C J Scott; M Crowe; J S Elborn Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Yasmin N Parsons; Stavroula Panagea; Catherine H M Smart; Martin J Walshaw; C Anthony Hart; Craig Winstanley Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: U Römling; B Fiedler; J Bosshammer; D Grothues; J Greipel; H von der Hardt; B Tümmler Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 1994-12 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: K Cheng; R L Smyth; J R Govan; C Doherty; C Winstanley; N Denning; D P Heaf; H van Saene; C A Hart Journal: Lancet Date: 1996-09-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Prabhakar Salunkhe; Catherine H M Smart; J Alun W Morgan; Stavroula Panagea; Martin J Walshaw; C Anthony Hart; Robert Geffers; Burkhard Tümmler; Craig Winstanley Journal: J Bacteriol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 3.490
Authors: Heidi L Williams; Lynne Turnbull; Susan J Thomas; Anna Murphy; Tim Stinear; David S Armstrong; Cynthia B Whitchurch Journal: Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob Date: 2010-07-16 Impact factor: 3.944
Authors: Joshua Quick; Nicola Cumley; Christopher M Wearn; Marc Niebel; Chrystala Constantinidou; Chris M Thomas; Mark J Pallen; Naiem S Moiemen; Amy Bamford; Beryl Oppenheim; Nicholas J Loman Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-11-04 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Chloe E James; Joanne L Fothergill; Amanda J Hall; Jennifer Cottell; Michael A Brockhurst; Craig Winstanley Journal: BMC Microbiol Date: 2012-09-21 Impact factor: 3.605
Authors: Joanne L Fothergill; Stavroula Panagea; Charles A Hart; Martin J Walshaw; Tyrone L Pitt; Craig Winstanley Journal: BMC Microbiol Date: 2007-05-23 Impact factor: 3.605
Authors: Elli A Wright; Joanne L Fothergill; Steve Paterson; Michael A Brockhurst; Craig Winstanley Journal: BMC Microbiol Date: 2013-07-23 Impact factor: 3.605