Literature DB >> 20186836

Distinction between intact and antibiotic-inactivated bacteria by real-time PCR after treatment with propidium monoazide.

Hideo Kobayashi1, Margret Oethinger, Marion J Tuohy, Gerri S Hall, Thomas W Bauer.   

Abstract

One limitation to the use of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to identify orthopedic infections has been apparent false-positive results, possibly due to the detection of dead bacteria. We recently showed that the use of DNA-binding agent propidium monoazide (PMA) could distinguish viable from heat-inactivated bacteria, and, in this study, we investigated whether the same technique can be applied to bacteria killed by two antibiotics with distinctly different mechanisms of action, a test of greater clinical relevance than thermal inactivation. Staphylococcus aureus and S. epidermidis were inactivated by vancomycin and gentamicin and treated with PMA or left untreated before DNA extraction. The threshold cycle difference of antibiotic-treated bacteria with and without PMA pretreatment was investigated with PCR primers for the 16S rDNA and tuf genes. Our results indicated that PMA effectively inhibited detection by PCR of bacteria, which had been inactivated by either vancomycin or gentamicin. The effect was statistically significant at 24 h after treatment (C(t) difference consistently >3; p < 0.05) and after 10 days of treatment (C(t) difference >4; p < 0.01), when compared to viable cells (C(t) difference 1-2). Vancomycin had a stronger effect on the C(t) value than gentamicin, reflecting the different mechanism of action of each antibiotic. Techniques of this type may help reduce clinically false-positive PCR results caused by the detection of dead bacteria, and may be especially useful in patients who have received antibiotics, such as patients undergoing the second stage of a two-stage revision for infected arthroplasty. (c) 2010 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20186836     DOI: 10.1002/jor.21108

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Res        ISSN: 0736-0266            Impact factor:   3.494


  7 in total

Review 1.  Dead or alive: molecular assessment of microbial viability.

Authors:  Gerard A Cangelosi; John S Meschke
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2014-07-18       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 2.  Advances and Challenges in Viability Detection of Foodborne Pathogens.

Authors:  Dexin Zeng; Zi Chen; Yuan Jiang; Feng Xue; Baoguang Li
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2016-11-22       Impact factor: 5.640

3.  Rapid detection of periprosthetic joint infection using a combination of 16s rDNA polymerase chain reaction and lateral flow immunoassay: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  V Janz; J Schoon; C Morgenstern; B Preininger; S Reinke; G Duda; A Breitbach; C F Perka; S Geissler
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 5.853

Review 4.  Methods to detect infectious human enteric viruses in environmental water samples.

Authors:  Ibrahim Ahmed Hamza; Lars Jurzik; Klaus Überla; Michael Wilhelm
Journal:  Int J Hyg Environ Health       Date:  2011-09-15       Impact factor: 5.840

5.  An Assay Combining Droplet Digital PCR With Propidium Monoazide Treatment for the Accurate Detection of Live Cells of Vibrio vulnificus in Plasma Samples.

Authors:  Ling Hu; Yidong Fu; Shun Zhang; Zhilei Pan; Jiang Xia; Peng Zhu; Jing Guo
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2022-07-15       Impact factor: 6.064

6.  Molecular viability testing of bacterial pathogens from a complex human sample matrix.

Authors:  Kris M Weigel; Kelly L Jones; Julie S Do; Jody Melton Witt; Jae-Hyun Chung; Christian Valcke; Gerard A Cangelosi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-24       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Molecular viability testing of viable but non-culturable bacteria induced by antibiotic exposure.

Authors:  Seunguk Lee; Sungwoo Bae
Journal:  Microb Biotechnol       Date:  2017-12-15       Impact factor: 5.813

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.