| Literature DB >> 32717983 |
Valentin-Mihai Dospinescu1, Akira Tiele2, James A Covington2.
Abstract
Current available methods for the clinical diagnosis of urinary tract infection (UTI) rely on a urine dipstick test or culturing of pathogens. The dipstick test is rapid (available in 1-2 min), but has a low positive predictive value, while culturing is time-consuming and delays diagnosis (24-72 h between sample collection and pathogen identification). Due to this delay, broad-spectrum antibiotics are often prescribed immediately. The over-prescription of antibiotics should be limited, in order to prevent the development of antimicrobial resistance. As a result, there is a growing need for alternative diagnostic tools. This paper reviews applications of chemical-analysis instruments, such as gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), selected ion flow tube mass spectrometry (SIFT-MS), ion mobility spectrometry (IMS), field asymmetric ion mobility spectrometry (FAIMS) and electronic noses (eNoses) used for the diagnosis of UTI. These methods analyse volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that emanate from the headspace of collected urine samples to identify the bacterial pathogen and even determine the causative agent's resistance to different antibiotics. There is great potential for these technologies to gain wide-spread and routine use in clinical settings, since the analysis can be automated, and test results can be available within minutes after sample collection. This could significantly reduce the necessity to prescribe broad-spectrum antibiotics and allow the faster and more effective use of narrow-spectrum antibiotics.Entities:
Keywords: electronic nose (eNose); gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS); ion mobility spectrometry (IMS); metabolite detection; pattern recognition; urinary tract infection (UTI); volatile organic compound (VOC)
Year: 2020 PMID: 32717983 PMCID: PMC7460005 DOI: 10.3390/bios10080083
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biosensors (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6374
Figure 1Volatile organic compound (VOC) detection technologies for analysis of urinary tract infection (UTI) urine samples; (Top) gas chromatography—mass spectrometry (GC-MS): the column of the GC is represented in blue, resulting in compound separation based on their physical properties and mass; (Middle) ion mobility spectrometry (IMS): the separation of compounds based on ion mobility is represented by different groups of VOCs clustering together; (Bottom) electronic nose (eNose): the eNose response is based on an array of different cross-sensitive gas sensors. A typical response is shown for each method. VOCs are illustrated as green, blue, yellow and red circles.
Characteristics of Volatile Organic Compound Detection Technologies.
| Technology | eNoses | IMS | GC-MS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| Portability | Good | Good | Good | Poor |
| Cost | Low | Low | Low | High |
| Trained personnel | No | No | No | Yes |
| Sample throughput | High | High | Medium | Low |
| Speed | Real-time | Real-time | Real-time | Off-line |
| Metabolite detection | No | No | No 1 | Yes |
| Pattern recognition | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Chemical insight | No | No | Yes | Yes |
| Sensor drift | Yes | Yes | Minor | Minor |
1 Some IMS constructs allow for metabolite detection. Abbreviations: Electronic noses—eNoses; Ion mobility spectrometry—IMS; Gas chromatography—ion mobility spectrometry—GC-IMS; Conducting polymer—CP; Metal oxide sensors—MOS.
Volatile Compounds of Different Urinary Tract Infection Pathogens.
| Compound | EC | PM | EF | PA | SA | KP | Compound | EC | PM | EF | PA | SA | KP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||||||||||
| Ethanol | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | ethyl acetate | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | ||
| Methanol | √ | N-propylacetate | √ | √ | |||||||||
| Propanol | √ | n-butyl acetate | √ | ||||||||||
| 1-propanol | √ | Ethyl phenylacetate | √ | ||||||||||
| N-propanol | √ | isopentyl acetate | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||||||
| 2-(Methylthio)-ethanol | √ | √ | √ | √ | 3-Methylbutyl 2-methylpropanoate | √ | |||||||
| phenol | √ | √ | 2-methylbutyl isobutyrate | √ | |||||||||
| Butanol | √ | √ | 2-Phenyl ethyl acetate | √ | |||||||||
| 1-butanol | √ | √ | Phenylethyl butyrate | √ | |||||||||
| 2-butanol | √ | √ | √ | √ | methyl 2-methylbutyrate | √ | |||||||
| Isobutanol | √ | √ | √ | √ | 2-methylbutyl 2-methylbutyrate | √ | |||||||
| 2-methyl-1-butanol | √ | methyl methacrylate | √ | √ | |||||||||
| 3-Methyl-1-butanol | √ | √ | √ | √ | ethyl 2-methylbutyrate | √ | |||||||
| octanol | √ | isoamyl butyrate | √ | √ | |||||||||
| Decanol | √ | amyl isovalerate | √ | ||||||||||
| 1-Decanol | √ | ethyl isovalerate | √ | ||||||||||
| dodecanol | √ | ethyl formate | √ | ||||||||||
| Benzyl Alcohol | √ | ethyl butanoate | √ | √ | |||||||||
| Isopentanol (isoamyl alcohol) | √ | √ | √ | √ | Propanoic acid 2-hydroxy-2-methyl-methyl ester | √ | |||||||
| phenethyl alcohol | √ | √ | ethyl formate | √ | |||||||||
| ethylene glycol | √ | √ | Phenylacetic acid propylester | √ | |||||||||
| 4-methylphenol | √ | √ |
| ||||||||||
| 2-methyl-1-propanol | √ | acetone | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||||||
| acetol (hydroxyacetone) | √ | Acetoin (3-hydroxybutanone) | √ | √ | |||||||||
| 2-phenylethyl alcohol | √ | butanedione (diacetyl) | √ | ||||||||||
| methylbutenol | √ | √ | √ | Butanone | √ | √ | √ | ||||||
| 2-butanone | √ | √ | √ | ||||||||||
|
| 2,3-butanedione | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||||||
| Acetaldehyde | √ | √ | 2-heptanone | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||||
| Benzaldehyde | √ | √ | 4-heptanone | √ | |||||||||
| 2-Heptenal | √ | √ | 2-nonanone | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||||
| (3-methylbutanal) Isovaleraldehyde | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 2-decanone | √ | ||||||
| 2-methylbutanal | √ | √ | √ | 2-hexanone | √ | ||||||||
| methylbutanal | √ | √ | √ | 2-Tridecanone | √ | ||||||||
| isobutyraldehyde | √ | 2-undecanone | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | ||||||
| 3-(ethylthio)-propanal | √ | 2,3-Heptanedione | √ | ||||||||||
| Propanal | √ | 2-pentanone | √ | √ | √ | ||||||||
| 3-methyl-2-butenal | √ | 2-aminoacetophenone | √ | √ | |||||||||
| 2-ethylacrolein | √ | 3-octanone | √ | ||||||||||
| (Z)-2-methyl-2-butenal | √ | methyl isobutylketone | √ | ||||||||||
| (E)-2-methyl-2-butenal | √ | mercaptoacetone | √ | ||||||||||
| Methacrolein | √ | 1-hydroxy-2-propanone | √ | ||||||||||
| 2-methylpropanal | √ | ||||||||||||
| Nonanal | √ | 1-methyl-4-(1-methylethenyl)cyclohexane | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||||||
| formaldehyde | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
|
| isobutyric acid | √ | |||||||||||
| Toluene | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | Butyric acid | √ | ||||||
| 1-Methyl-naphthalene | √ | 4-methylhexanoic acid | √ | ||||||||||
| 2-Methyl-naphthalene | √ | Picolinic acid N-oxide | √ | ||||||||||
| Isoprene | √ | √ | Isoamyl benzoate | √ | |||||||||
| 2-Butene | √ |
| |||||||||||
| (Z)-2-butene | √ | methyl mercaptan (Methanethiol) | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||||
| (E)-2-butene | √ | dimethyl disulfide | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||||
| Undecane | √ | √ | dimethyl sulfide | √ | √ | √ | √ | ||||||
| 2,4-dimethylheptane | √ | √ | √ | √ | dimethyl trisulfide | √ | √ | √ | √ | ||||
| 3-methylheptane | √ | Benzyl methyl sulfide | √ | ||||||||||
| undecene | √ | 2-methoxy-5-methylthiophene | √ | ||||||||||
| 1-undecene | √ | S-Methyl thiobenzoate | √ | ||||||||||
| 2-methyl-2-butene | √ | 2,4-dithiapentane | √ | ||||||||||
| 1,10-undecadiene | √ | ||||||||||||
| 1-nonene | √ |
| |||||||||||
| 2-Nonene | √ | Trichloromethane | √ | √ | |||||||||
| 1-decene | √ | 4-Chloro-1H-indole | √ | ||||||||||
| 1-dodecene | √ | ||||||||||||
| Butane | √ |
| |||||||||||
| n-butane | √ | ammonia | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||||||
| 10-methyl-1-undecene | √ | Hydrogen Sulfide | √ | √ | √ | ||||||||
| 1,3-butadiene | √ | ||||||||||||
| 2-methylpropene | √ |
| |||||||||||
| Propane | √ | pyrazine derivative | √ | √ | |||||||||
| 2-Nonene, 3-methyl | √ | benzene derivative | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | ||||||
| 2,3,4-Trimethylhexane | √ | phenol derivative | √ | √ | √ | ||||||||
| hexane | √ | pentanone/toluene | √ | √ | √ | ||||||||
| 2,3,3-trimethylpentane | √ | ||||||||||||
| Acetic acid | √ | √ | √ |
| |||||||||
| Isovaleric acid | √ | indole dimer | √ | ||||||||||
| 2-methylbutyric acid | √ | ethylamine | √ | ||||||||||
| Indole | √ | √ | |||||||||||
|
| 3-Methyl-1H-indole | √ | |||||||||||
| methylpyrazine | √ | √ | Cadaverine | √ | √ | ||||||||
| benzonitrile | √ | √ | √ | √ | putrescine | √ | |||||||
| 2,3,5-trimethylpyrazine | √ | Acetonitrile | √ | √ | √ | ||||||||
| N-(Phenylmethylene)-methanamine | √ | beta-phenylethylamine | √ | ||||||||||
| N,N′-Dibenzylideneethylenediamine | √ | ||||||||||||
| N-(Phenylmethylene)-1-propanamine | √ |
| [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | |||||
| N-(Phenylmethylene)-1-butanamine | √ | √ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | |||||
| n-nitrosodimethylamine | √ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | |||||||
| pyrrolidine | √ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | |||||||
| Isoamylamine | √ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | |||||||
| Isobutylamine | √ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | |||||||
| 3-Methyl-N-(3-methylbutylidene)-1-butanamine | √ | [ | [ | [ | [ | ||||||||
| Benzyl nitrile | √ | [ | [ | [ | [ | ||||||||
| N-Butyl-benzenamine | √ | [ | [ | [ | [ | ||||||||
| 2-(3-Methylbutyl)-3,5-dimethylpyrazine | √ | √ | [ | [ | |||||||||
| 3-Methyl-N-(2-phenylethylidene)-1-butanamine | √ | [ | [ | ||||||||||
| p-Pentylaniline | √ | [ | |||||||||||
| N-(1,1-Dimethylethyl)-benzamide | √ | [ | |||||||||||
| N-n-Butylphthalimide | √ | ||||||||||||
| 4-methyl-quinazoline | √ | ||||||||||||
| Dimethylpyrazine | √ | ||||||||||||
| pyrrole | √ | ||||||||||||
| 3-methylpyrrole | √ | ||||||||||||
| 1-vinyl aziridine | √ | ||||||||||||
| Pyrimidine | √ | ||||||||||||
| 2-Acetylthiazole | √ | ||||||||||||
| Trimethylamine | √ | √ | √ |
Abbreviations: EC—Escherichia coli, PM—Proteus mirabilis, EF—Enterococcus faecalis, PA—Pseudomonas aeruginosa, SA—Staphylococcus aureus, KP—Klebsiella pneumoniae.
Urinary Tract Infection and Pathogen Volatile Organic Compounds Detection.
| Reference and Year | Technology | Number | Culture for Headspace Analysis | Experiment/Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hayward et al. [ | Gas-liquid chromatograph | 68 strains | Basal defined media with potassium lactate, amino acids and salts. Nutrient Broth (Oxoid) and MacConkey agar (Oxoid). Incubation still/shaken (160 rpm) at 37 °C | Samples were mechanically shaken for 5 min at 37 °C followed by 3 min incubation at 60 °C prior to analysis. It was found that |
| Hayward et al. [ | Gas-liquid chromatograph | 14 bacterial species | Basal defined media with lactate, amino acids, salts and vitamins cultured still at 37 °C or yeast extract broth still/shaken at 160 rpm. | |
| Coloe et al. [ | Gas-liquid chromatograph | 49 strains | 24 h, unshaken cultures. Media: arabinose, amino acid mixture, salt mixture, pH 7.4, nicotinic acid (0.5 mg) and calcium pantothenate | 39/49 clinical samples: urine—29, faeces—8, pus—1, sputum—1. |
| Coloe et al. [ | Gas-liquid chromatograph | 122 urine samples | 37 °C, 4 h shaking in 6 mL yeast-extract peptone water enriched with arabinose and methionine | 94 samples from UTI suspected patients, 28 uninfected controls. Results available in 4 h. |
| Hayward et al. [ | Gas-liquid chromatograph | 382 urine samples | Methionine yeast-extract peptone medium supplemented with arabinose incubated for 3.5 h. | |
| Manja et al. [ | Gas-chromatography | 96 urine samples | 16 cases caused by | |
| Davies et al. [ | Gas-liquid chromatograph | 125 strains | Urine culture, 37 °C, 3.5 h, unshaken, media made of yeast-extract peptone medium concentrate. | For headspace samples—liquid temperature 60 °C for 5 min. Production of trimethylamine from acetylcholine biomarker for |
| Aathithan et al. [ | Osmetech Microbial Analyzer (OMA) Polymer sensor array | 534 clinical samples | No | Sensitivity of 83.48%, specificity of 87.59% (infection defined as >1 × 105 CFU/mL). 72.3% sensitivity and 89.38% Specificity at 104 CFU/mL cut-off. Threshold PCA values were set using control experiments with reconstituted urine specimens inoculated with bacteria (4 cultures for each organism—result average 4 replicates)—4 blanks for each organism. Organisms: |
| Pavlou et al. [ | Bloodhound BH114 | 25 and 45 urine samples | 4.5 h incubation in enhanced media at 37 °C. Media included: 60% brain heart infusion broth, 40% cooked meat broth. | 37 °C water bath for VOC sampling. First experiment: 20 out of 25 samples UTI confirmed—9 |
| Yates et al. [ | Cyranose 320 electronic nose and Agilent 4440 Chemosensor | 189 Sensor Responses for Urine (Cyranose 320) | No | Data reduction and optimisation using non-linear model with a kernel width parameter achieved 80% accuracy. Different statistical methods were used accuracy attained: ARX model 65%, 67% (using data from 19/32 sensors), 71% using the most negatively correlated sensor; RBF—50%, using correlation results 65%, Hybrid NARX model—80%. (73% when sensor number was reduced). |
| Yates et al. [ | Agilent 4440 | 28 and 40 samples for | Yes | Agilent 4440 was used along with a pattern recognition algorithm (radial basis function network) to distinguish between methicillin resistant and susceptible |
| Kodogiannis et al. [ | Bloodhound BH114 | 45 urine samples | Culture with Volatile generating kit, 5 h incubation at 37 °C | Headspace sample—37 °C water bath. 45 samples, 30 UTI (confirmed by microscopy + culture)—13 |
| Bruins et al. [ | MonoNose | 52 strains | BD-BACTEC™–Plus-Anaerobic/FMedium with the addition of 0.1 mM FeCl3 for measurements. Other commercially available culture broths with different chemicals added were also tested | 104 measurements taken. Bacterial species tested: |
| Storer et al. [ | SIFT-MS | 90 (10 replicate samples for each microbe) | Inoculation of sterile urine for 6 h. | 10 samples of inoculated urine for each pathogen: |
| Thorn et al. [ | SIFT-MS | 11 strains (66—3 repeats for each strain at 5 h and 24 h) | Bacterial plate cultures (20–24 h after inoculation) were emulsified in 5 mL of 1% tryptone-0.5% yeast extract broth, incubated at 37 °C, orbital shaking, 200 rpm, 24 h. | |
| Wiesner et al. [ | IMR-MS | 4 strains | Liquid cultures in Muller-Hinton medium shaken at 200 rpm and 37 °C | Antibiotic sensitive/resistant bacteria strain identification. Two strains of |
| Bean et al. [ | GCxGC-TOF-MS | 2 PA14 cultures and one LB-Lennox blank | 24 h culture at 37 °C in lysogeny broth, Lennox | Discovered 28 new volatiles for |
| Jünger et al. [ | MCC-IMS | 15 human pathogens | 24 h at 37 °C on Columbia sheep blood agar. | Detection of VOC for |
| Sabeel et al. [ | Cyranose 320 | 13 urine samples, selected 9 | No | Cyranose 320 was introduced in 2 mL of urine 10 times for each of the 13 samples. PCA was used for analysis (first component explained 97.087% of the variation). 9 samples were selected and classified as healthy (2), containing bacteria (1), containing mucus (9)—UTI marker. |
| Roine et al. [ | ChemPro 100i, Environics Inc., Mikkeli, Finland | 101 Cultures from clinical samples | Cysteine lactose electrolytedeficient (CLED) medium | Pathogens: |
| Boots et al. [ | GC-MS | 200 (40 cultures for each bacteria) | Overnight culture, 37 °C, blood agar plates. Bacteria transferred to sterile brain heart infusion broth for 4 h, agitated at 37 °C. | 4 bacteria studied: |
| Karami et al. [ | GC-MS | 18 (2 medium used, 3 time points, 3 organisms) | 24 h in nutrient agar, subcultured at 37 °C in two different broth medium—Muller Hinton Broth and tryptic soy broth. | Identifying VOCs of |
| Ratiu et al. [ | ChemPro-100i (Environics Oy, Finland)and TD-GC-MS (for confirmation) | 90 (3 replicates at 3 time points for each of the 10 cultures) and 30 for confirmation | Agar growth medium, 30 °C for | 540 headspace samples were analysed (270 from bacteria and 270 blanks with medium only). Discrimination between blanks and culture, the three species: |
| DeJong et al. [ | Surface enhanced Raman spectroscopy | 3 Strains | Liquid Culture in Tryptic Soy Broth Soybean-Casein Digest medium for 16 h at 37 °C transferred to agar-coated plates (Tryptic Soy Agar Soybean-casein Digest). SERS substrate was added. | The technique was applied to both cultures and simulated urine and blood infections with discrimination possible after 16 h. |
| Rees et al. [ | GCxGC-TOF-MS | 100 clinical isolates (blood/urine) | 37 °C 200 rpm shaking overnight in Difco Mueller-Hinston Broth (pre-culture) and 1:1000 same conditions for 12 h. | Prior to headspace analysis: 60 min at 37 °C, 200 rpm. Discrimination between the most common infectious pathogens in blood and urine ( |
| Smart et al. [ | TD-GC-MS | 86 chromatograms, 18 bacterial isolates | Overnight cultures, shaking at 180 rpm, 37 °C. Subcultures grown for 3 h. Antibiotics (cephalexin or ciprofloxacin) added after 2.5 h. | Bacteria: |
| Adebiyi et al. [ | IBM Electronic Volatile Analyzer | - | 5-day culture in normal human urine at 37 °C | Concentration of bacteria 1 × 109 CFU/mL. Incubated at 37 °C during sampling. Different models (LR, SVM, RF, MLP) had different accuracy (overall, 90%> and some had 100%) |