| Literature DB >> 27065958 |
Hongxia Guan1, Jingyun Zhang2, Yong Xiao1, Dan Sha1, Xia Ling1, Biao Kan2.
Abstract
Diarrhea can be caused by a variety of bacterial, viral and parasitic organisms. Laboratory diagnosis is essential in the pathogen-specific burden assessment. In the pathogen spectrum monitoring in the diarrheal surveillance, culture methods are commonly used for the bacterial pathogens' detection whereas nucleic acid based amplification, the non-cultural methods are used for the viral pathogens. Different methodology may cause the inaccurate pathogen spectrum for the bacterial pathogens because of their different culture abilities with the different media, and for the comparison of bacterial vs. viral pathogens. The application of nucleic acid-based methods in the detection of viral and bacterial pathogens will likely increase the number of confirmed positive diagnoses, and will be comparable since all pathogens will be detected based on the same nucleic acid extracts from the same sample. In this study, bacterial pathogens, including diarrheagenic Escherichia coli (DEC), Salmonella spp., Shigella spp., Vibrio parahaemolyticus and V. cholerae, were detected in 334 diarrheal samples by PCR-based methods using nucleic acid extracted from stool samples and associated enrichment cultures. A protocol was established to facilitate the consistent identification of bacterial pathogens in diarrheal patients. Five common enteric viruses were also detected by RT-PCR, including rotavirus, sapovirus, norovirus (I and II), human astrovirus, and enteric adenovirus. Higher positive rates were found for the bacterial pathogens, showing the lower proportion estimation if only using culture methods. This application will improve the quality of bacterial diarrheagenic pathogen survey, providing more accurate information pertaining to the pathogen spectrum associated with finding of food safety problems and disease burden evaluation.Entities:
Keywords: PCR; bacterial pathogens; diarrheal disease; diarrheogenic pathogen; viral pathogens
Year: 2016 PMID: 27065958 PMCID: PMC4811922 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2016.00386
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Figure 1The protocol for multiple pathogen detection used in the study. APW, Alkaline Peptone Water; DEC, diarrheagenic Escherichia coli; EMB, Eosin Methylene Blue agar; SBG, Selenite Brilliant Green Broth; XLD, Xylose Lysine Deoxycholate medium.
Primer sequences for multiplex PCR of DEC (Zhao et al., .
| F: CCCCCTGGACGAAGACTGAC; R: ACCGCTGGCAACAAAGGATA | 401 | 100 | |
| F: GTTCCTTGACCGCCTTTCCGATACCGTC; R: GCCGGTCAGCCACCCTCTGAGAGTAC | 619 | 200 | |
| F: AAATCGCCATTCGTTGACTACTTCT; R: TGCCATTCTGGCAACTCGCGATGCA | 370 | 400 | |
| F: CAGTCGTCACTCACTGGTTTCATCAC; R: GGATATTCTCCCCACTCTGACACC | 283 | 400 | |
| F: TCAATGCAGTTCCGTTATCAGTT; R: GTAAAGTCCGTTACCCCAACCTG | 482 | 400 | |
| F: GTATACACAAAAGAAGGAAGC; R: ACAGAATCGTCAGCATCAGC | 254 | 600 | |
| F: TCTCTATGTGCATACGGAGC; R: CCATACTGATTGCCGCAA | 322 | 500 | |
| F: TGCTAAACCAGTAGAGTCTTCAAAA; R: GCAGGATTACAACACAATTCACAGCAG | 138 | 400 |
Sequences of primers and probes used in this study.
| Rotavirus | NVP3_F | ACCATCTWCACRTRACCCTC | / |
| NVP3_R | GGTCACATAACGCCCC | ||
| NVP3_R1 | GGTCACATAACGCCCCTATA | ||
| NVP3_Probe | FAM-ATGAGCACAATAGTTAAAAGCTAACACTGTCAA-TAMARA | ||
| Sapovirus | SV_F | GCTGTTSCYACTGGTGCA | / |
| SV_R | GGCATCCTGTCRTTCCAAGCA | ||
| SV_Probe | FAM-CCAATCSAATGTCCCTGAGGCAATACGSAA-TAMARA | ||
| Norovirus I | COG1_F | CGYTGGATGCGNTTYCATGA | / |
| COG1_R | CTTAGACGCCATCATCATTYAC | ||
| RING1(a)_TP | FAM-AGATYGCGATCYCCTGTCCA-TAMARA | ||
| RING1(b)_TP | FAM-AGATCGCGGTCTCCTGTCCA-TAMARA | ||
| Norovirus II | COG2_F | CARGARBCNATGTTYAGRTGGATGAG | / |
| COG2_R | TCGACGCCATCTTCATTCACA | ||
| RING2_TP | FAM-TGGGAGGGCGATCGCAATCT-TAMARA | ||
| Human astrovirus | AV1 AV2 Av_Probe | CCG AGT AGG ATC GAG GGT GCTTCTGATTAAATCAATTTTAA FAM-CTTTTCTGTCTCTGTTTAGATTATTTTAATCACC-TAMARA | / |
| Enteric adenovirus | Adeno.fwd | GCCACGGTGGGGTTTCTAAACTT | / |
| Adeno.rev | GCCCCAGTGGTCTTACATGCACATC | ||
| Adeno.probe1 | FAM-TGCACCAGACCCGGGCTCAGTACTCCGA-TAMARA | ||
| OMPCF | ATCGCTGACTTATGCAATCG | 204 (Kwang et al., | |
| OMPCR | CGGGTTGCGTTATAGGTCTG | ||
| virA-F | CTGCATTCTGGCAATCTCTTCACA | 215 (Fukushima et al., | |
| virA-R | TGATGAGCTAACTTCGTAAGCCCTCC | ||
| Internal control | IAC-f | CTAACCTTCGTGATGAGCAATCG | 145 (Deer et al., |
| IAC-r | GATCAGCTACGTGAGGTCCTAC |
Summary of the detection results in this study.
| 18 | 1 | 1 | 22 | 22 | |
| 2 | 8 | 8 | 4 | 4 | |
| DEC | 6 | 18 | 13 | 21 | 21 |
| 2 | 2 | ND | 2 | ND | |
| 2 | 1 | ND | 2 | ND | |
| Total | 30 | 30 | 51 | ||
Positive results from Shigella broth, 122 specimens from August to October.
Not detected.
Comparison of the detection results between PCR-based methods and culture/isolation method.
| + | 1 | 17 | 18 | 0 | |
| − | 0 | 316 | 4 | 312 | |
| < 0.0001 | 0.0455 | ||||
| + | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| − | 6 | 326 | 3 | 118 | |
| 0.0143 | 0.0838 | ||||
| DEC | + | 2 | 4 | 5 | 1 |
| − | 11 | 317 | 16 | 312 | |
| 0.0707 | 0.0003 | ||||
Positive sample numbers and sensitivities of different methods for different pathogens.
| 1 (4.5%) | 22 (100%) | 18 (81.8%) | 22 | |
| 8 (100%) | 4 | 2 (25.0%) | 8 | |
| DEC | 13 (46.4%) | 21 (75%) | 6 (21.4%) | 28 |
| 2 (100%) | 2 (100%) | 2 (100%) | 2 | |
| 1 (50.0%) | 2 (100%) | 2 (100%) | 2 | |
Positive results from Shigella broth, 122 specimens from August to October.
Figure 2Seasonal epidemic occurrence curve for viruses and bacteria.
Figure 3The protocol for multiple pathogen surveillance (developed as a result of this study). APW, Alkaline Peptone Water; DEC, diarrheagenic Escherichia coli; EMB, Eosin Methylene Blue agar; SBG, Selenite Brilliant Green Broth; XLD, Xylose Lysine Deoxycholate medium.