| Literature DB >> 26138214 |
Arisa Tsuru1, Takao Setoguchi2, Naoya Kawabata3, Masataka Hirotsu4, Takuya Yamamoto5, Satoshi Nagano6, Masahiro Yokouchi7, Hironori Kakoi8, Hideki Kawamura9, Yasuhiro Ishidou10, Akihide Tanimoto11, Setsuro Komiya12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To effectively treat orthopaedic infections by methicillin-resistant strains, an early diagnosis is necessary. Bacterial cultures and real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) have been used to define methicillin-resistant staphylococci. However, even when patients display clinical signs of infections, bacterial culture and real-time PCR often cannot confirm infection. The aim of this study was to prospectively compare the utility of real-time PCR for the mecA gene detection following centrifugation of human samples with suspected orthopaedic infections.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26138214 PMCID: PMC4490765 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-015-1180-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Figure 1M-PCR improved detection of the mecA gene in vitro. To compare the detection sensitivity of the M-PCR method with the conventional real-time PCR method, we created a dilution series using cultured MRSA (×1:1 time; ×10:10 times; ×100:100 times). DNA was purified by conventional methods (A) or following centrifugation (B: M-PCR). Centrifugation promoted more rapid arrival at the threshold cycle (Fluorescence: 0.56). A comparative Ct (ΔCt) analysis was performed to examine fold changes of the mecA gene. The experiment was performed in triplicate with similar results.
Figure 2M-PCR did not increase detection of the mecA gene in purified DNA. To compare the detection sensitivity of the M-PCR method with the conventional real-time PCR method, we made diluent using the purified DNA of MRSA. DNA was first purified from cultured MRSA and dissolved in 5 mL PBS. Next, DNA was purified by conventional methods (A) or following centrifugation (B: M-PCR). A comparative Ct (ΔCt) analysis was performed to examine fold changes of the mecA gene. The results showed that M-PCR did not increase the detection of the mecA gene in purified DNA. The experiment was performed in triplicate with similar results.
Figure 3M-PCR improved the detection of mecA gene in clinical samples. To compare the detection sensitivity of the M-PCR method with the conventional real-time PCR method, we analysed infectious tissues collected from patients. DNA was purified by conventional methods (A) or following centrifugation (B: M-PCR). A comparative Ct (ΔCt) analysis was performed to examine fold changes of the mecA gene. Only M-PCR, but not conventional real-time PCR, detected the mecA gene from three clinically infected samples, including one pseudoarthrosis (a). M-PCR improved the detection of the mecA gene 6.96 times higher than conventional real-time PCR methods (b). The experiment was performed in triplicate with similar results.