Literature DB >> 25839345

Comparison of Validated Polymerase Chain Reaction and Culture Isolation for the Routine Detection of Acanthamoeba From Ocular Samples.

Regis P Kowalski1, Melissa A Melan, Lisa M Karenchak, Alex Mammen.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Acanthamoeba keratitis should be definitively diagnosed for appropriate therapy. Our institution has validated polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as a routine diagnostic test to detect Acanthamoeba DNA from ocular samples. We compared PCR with culture isolation for detecting Acanthamoeba from ocular samples.
METHODS: The microbiology records of patients that had specimens submitted (May 2012 to January 2014) for laboratory testing for Acanthamoeba keratitis were reviewed for (1) Acanthamoeba culture isolation, (2) Acanthamoeba DNA detection by PCR, and (3) non-Acanthamoeba culture results. For Acanthamoeba isolation, corneal samples were planted on nonnutrient agar overlaid with Enterobacter aerogenes. Validated PCR (May 2012) for Acanthamoeba DNA was processed at the Division of Molecular Diagnostics, UPMC, Pittsburgh, PA. Additional cultures were obtained for bacteria, fungus, and virus (i.e., herpes simplex virus) using standard techniques.
RESULTS: Culture isolation and PCR were processed on 125 patients with a differential diagnosis of Acanthamoeba keratitis. Of these, 104 (83.2%) were culture negative, PCR negative; 14 (11.2%) were culture positive, PCR positive; 4 (3.2%) were culture negative, PCR positive; and, 3 (2.4%) were culture positive, PCR negative. Culture and PCR were statistically equivalent for detecting Acanthamoeba from ocular samples (P=1.0, McNemar's test). Nineteen of the culture-negative, PCR-negative corneal samples (18.3%) were positive for other pathogens such as bacteria, fungus, and virus.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no clear advantage of PCR over culture isolation for detecting Acanthamoeba in ocular specimens. Other pathogens such as bacteria, fungus, and virus must still be considered in severe persistent keratitis. Polymerase chain reaction seems to be a complementary test for the clinical support of Acanthamoeba keratitis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25839345     DOI: 10.1097/ICL.0000000000000131

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eye Contact Lens        ISSN: 1542-2321            Impact factor:   2.018


  6 in total

1.  Comparison of culture, confocal microscopy and PCR in routine hospital use for microbial keratitis diagnosis.

Authors:  Jeremy J Hoffman; John K G Dart; Surjo K De; Nicole Carnt; Georgia Cleary; Scott Hau
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2021-11-05       Impact factor: 4.456

2.  Utility of investigation for suspected microbial keratitis: a diagnostic accuracy study.

Authors:  Stephen Tuft; Catey Bunce; Surjo De; John Thomas
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2022-01-31       Impact factor: 4.456

3.  The Value of Cytology Smears for Acanthamoeba Keratitis.

Authors:  Sangita P Patel; Jamie L Schaefer; Ryan Jaber; Joyce Paterson; Weiguo Liu; Federico Gonzalez-Fernandez
Journal:  Case Rep Ophthalmol Med       Date:  2016-06-15

Review 4.  Diagnostic armamentarium of infectious keratitis: A comprehensive review.

Authors:  Darren S J Ting; Bhavesh P Gopal; Rashmi Deshmukh; Gerami D Seitzman; Dalia G Said; Harminder S Dua
Journal:  Ocul Surf       Date:  2021-11-13       Impact factor: 5.033

5.  Anti-Infective Treatment and Resistance Is Rarely Problematic with Eye Infections.

Authors:  Regis P Kowalski; Shannon V Nayyar; Eric G Romanowski; Vishal Jhanji
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-06

Review 6.  Practical Guidance for Clinical Microbiology Laboratories: Diagnosis of Ocular Infections.

Authors:  Sixto M Leal; Kyle G Rodino; W Craig Fowler; Peter H Gilligan
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 50.129

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.