Annals of Laboratory Medicine

Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine (대한진단검사의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Sputum and Nasopharyngeal Swab Specimens for Molecular Diagnosis of Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydophila pneumoniae, and Legionella pneumophila

  • Cho, Min-Chul (Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Hyewon (Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center) ;
  • An, Dongheui (Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Lee, Miyoung (Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Noh, Shin-Ae (Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Mi-Na (Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Chong, Young Pil (Division of Infectious Disease, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Woo, Jun Hee (Division of Infectious Disease, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center)
  • Published : 2012.03.01
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: Differentiation of atypical pathogens is important for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). In this study, we compared sputum and nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) for use in detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae (MP), Chlamydophila pneumoniae (CP), and Legionella pneumophila (LP), using Seeplex PneumoBacter ACE Detection Assay (PneumoBacter; Seegene). Methods: Sputum and NPS specimens were collected from patients in 15 hospitals. DNA was extracted from sputum using QIAamp DNA Stool Mini Kit (Qiagen) and from NPS using easyMAG (bioM$\acute{e}$rieux). Both types of specimens were evaluated by multiplex PCR using PneumoBacter. To determine the diagnostic performance of this assay, sputum samples were also tested using BD ProbeTec ET Atypical Pneumonia Assay (APA; Becton Dickinson). Results: Among 217 sputum and NPS, 20 (9.2%), 2 (0.9%), and 0 sputum were positive for MP, LP, and CP, respectively, whereas 8 (3.7%) NPS were positive for MP. The sputum APA test yielded 186, 206, and 204 interpretable results for MP, LP, and CP, respectively. Of these, 21 (11.3%) were positive for MP, 2 (1.0%) were positive for LP, and 0 samples were positive for CP. Compared to APA, the sensitivity and specificity of the sputum assay for MP were 95.2% and 100.0%, respectively, whereas for the NPS assay, these were 38.1% and 93.9%. Sputum testing was more sensitive than NPS testing (P =0.002). For LP and CP diagnosis, PneumoBacter and APA tests agreed 100%. Conclusions: Specimen type is crucial and sputum is preferred over NPS for simultaneous detection of MP, LP, and CP using multiplex PCR in CAP.

Keywords

References

  1. Blasi F. Atypical pathogens and respiratory tract infections. Eur Respir J 2004;24:171-81. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.04.00135703
  2. Cunha BA. The atypical pneumonias: clinical diagnosis and importance. Clin Microbiol Infect 2006;12(S3):S12-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-0691.2006.01393.x
  3. Chong YP, Jung KS, Lee KH, Kim MN, Moon SM, Park S, et al. The bacterial etiology of community-acquired pneumonia in Korea: a nationwide prospective multicenter study. Infect Chemother 2010;42:397-403. https://doi.org/10.3947/ic.2010.42.6.397
  4. Lim WS, Baudouin SV, George RC, Hill AT, Jamieson C, Le Jeune I, et al. BTS guidelines for the management of community acquired pneumonia in adults: update 2009. Thorax 2009;64(S3):iii1-55.
  5. Mandell LA, Wunderink RG, Anzueto A, Bartlett JG, Campbell GD, Dean NC, et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Thoracic Society consensus guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults. Clin Infect Dis 2007;44(S2):S27-72.
  6. Thurman KA, Warner AK, Cowart KC, Benitez AJ, Winchell JM. Detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydia pneumoniae, and Legionella spp. in clinical specimens using a single-tube multiplex real-time PCR assay. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2011;70:1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2010.11.014
  7. Socan M, Marinic-Fiser N, Kraigher A, Kotnik A, Logar M. Microbial aetiology of community-acquired pneumonia in hospitalised patients. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1999;18:777-82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100960050400
  8. Templeton KE, Scheltinga SA, van den Eeden WC, Graffelman AW, van den Broek PJ, Claas EC. Improved diagnosis of the etiology of community- acquired pneumonia with real-time polymerase chain reaction. Clin Infect Dis 2005;41:345-51. https://doi.org/10.1086/431588
  9. Raty R, Ronkko E, Kleemola M. Sample type is crucial to the diagnosis of Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia by PCR. J Med Microbiol 2005; 54:287-91. https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.45888-0
  10. Murdoch DR. Molecular genetic methods in the diagnosis of lower respiratory tract infections. APMIS 2004;112:713-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0463.2004.apm11211-1202.x
  11. Stralin K, Backman A, Holmberg H, Fredlund H, Olcen P. Design of a multiplex PCR for Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumoniae to be used on sputum samples. APMIS 2005;113:99-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0463.2005.apm1130203.x
  12. Loens K, Beck T, Ursi D, Overdijk M, Sillekens P, Goossens H, et al. Development of real-time multiplex nucleic acid sequence-based amplification for detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydophila pneumoniae, and Legionella spp. in respiratory specimens. J Clin Microbiol 2008;46:185-91. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00447-07
  13. Loens K, Van Heirstraeten L, Malhotra-Kumar S, Goossens H, Ieven M. Optimal sampling sites and methods for detection of pathogens possibly causing community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections. J Clin Microbiol 2009;47:21-31. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02037-08
  14. Reznikov M, Blackmore TK, Finlay-Jones JJ, Gordon DL. Comparison of nasopharyngeal aspirates and throat swab specimens in a polymerase chain reaction-based test for Mycoplasma pneumoniae. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1995;14:58-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02112622
  15. Baron EJ and Thomson RB Jr. Specimen collection, transport, and processing: Bacteriology. In:Versalovic J, Carroll KC, et al. eds. Manual of clinical microbiology. 10th ed. Washington DC: ASM press, 2011:255-6.
  16. Dorigo-Zetsma JW, Verkooyen RP, van Helden HP, van der Nat H, van den Bosch JM. Molecular detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae in adults with community-acquired pneumonia requiring hospitalization. J Clin Microbiol 2001;39:1184-6. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.39.3.1184-1186.2001
  17. Kleemola SR, Karjalainen JE, Räty RK. Rapid diagnosis of Mycoplasma pneumoniae infection: clinical evaluation of a commercial probe test. J Infect Dis 1990;162:70-5. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/162.1.70
  18. Loens K, Beck T, Ursi D, Overdijk M, Sillekens P, Goossens H, et al. Evaluation of different nucleic acid amplification techniques for the detection of M. pneumoniae, C. pneumoniae and Legionella spp. in respiratory specimens from patients with community-acquired pneumonia. J Microbiol Methods 2008;73:257-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2008.02.010
  19. Honda J, Yano T, Kusaba M, Yonemitsu J, Kitajima H, Masuoka M, et al. Clinical use of capillary PCR to diagnose Mycoplasma pneumoniae. J Clin Microbiol 2000;38:1382-4.
  20. Brunner H. Adherence and pathogenicity of mycoplasma pneumoniae: a review. In: Ron E and Rottem S, eds. Microbial surface components and toxins in relation to pathogenesis. New york, NY: Plenum, 1991:81-9.
  21. Dorigo-Zetsma JW, Zaat SA, Vriesema AJ, Dankert J. Demonstration by a nested PCR for Mycoplasma pneumoniae that M. pneumoniae load in the throat is higher in patients hospitalised for M. pneumoniae infection than in non-hospitalised subjects. J Med Microbiol 1999;48:1115- 22. https://doi.org/10.1099/00222615-48-12-1115
  22. Kenny GE, Kaiser GG, Cooney MK, Foy HM. Diagnosis of Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia: sensitivities and specificities of serology with lipid antigen and isolation of the organism on soy peptone medium for identification of infections. J Clin Microbiol 1990;28:2087-93.
  23. Bencini MA, van den Brule AJ, Claas EC, Hermans MH, Melchers WJ, Noordhoek GT, et al. Multicenter comparison of molecular methods for detection of Legionella spp. in sputum samples. J Clin Microbiol 2007;45:3390-2. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00505-07
  24. Hernes SS, Quarsten H, Hagen E, Lyngroth AL, Pripp AH, Bjorvatn B, et al. Swabbing for respiratory viral infections in older patients: a comparison of rayon and nylon flocked swabs. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2011;30:159-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-010-1064-2
  25. Edelstein PH. Legionella. In:Versalovic J, Carroll KC, et al. eds. Manual of Clinical Microbiology. 10th ed. Washington DC: ASM press, 2011:774-5
  26. Den Boer JW and Yzerman EP. Diagnosis of Legionella infection in Legionnaires' disease. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2004;23:871-8.
  27. McDonough EA, Metzgar D, Hansen CJ, Myers CA, Russell KL. A cluster of Legionella-associated pneumonia cases in a population of military recruits. J Clin Microbiol 2007;45:2075-7. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02359-06
  28. Ramirez JA, Ahkee S, Tolentino A, Miller RD, Summersgill JT. Diagnosis of Legionella pneumophila, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, or Chlamydia pneumoniae lower respiratory infection using the polymerase chain reaction on a single throat swab specimen. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1996;24:7-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/0732-8893(95)00254-5
  29. Diederen BM and Peeters MF. Are oropharyngeal swabs suitable as samples for Legionella-specific PCR testing? J Clin Microbiol 2007;45:3482-3. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01495-07
  30. Gaydos C and Essig A. Chlamydiaceae. In:Versalovic J, Carroll KC, et al. eds. Manual of Clinical Microbiology. 10th ed. Washington DC: ASM press, 2011:990-1.
  31. Boman J, Allard A, Persson K, Lundborg M, Juto P, Wadell G. Rapid diagnosis of respiratory Chlamydia pneumoniae infection by nested touchdown polymerase chain reaction compared with culture and antigen detection by EIA. J Infect Dis 1997;175:1523-6. https://doi.org/10.1086/516492
  32. Kuoppa Y, Boman J, Scott L, Kumlin U, Eriksson I, Allard A. Quantitative detection of respiratory Chlamydia pneumoniae infection by realtime PCR. J Clin Microbiol 2002;40:2273-4. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.40.6.2273-2274.2002

Cited by

  1. Community-acquired pneumonia vol.19, pp.3, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1097/mcp.0b013e32835f1d12
  2. Macrolide Resistance of Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Its Detection Rate by Real-Time PCR in Primary and Tertiary Care Hospitals vol.33, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3343/alm.2013.33.6.410
  3. Evaluation of yield of currently available diagnostics by sample type to optimize detection of respiratory pathogens in patients with a community-acquired pneumonia vol.8, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1111/irv.12153
  4. Infection with Chlamydia pneumoniae as a cause of coronary heart disease: the hypothesis is still untested# vol.73, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1093/femspd/ftu015
  5. Recent Progress in Mycoplasma pneumoniae Infection vol.4, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1515/ii-2017-0102
  6. Detection of novel Chlamydiae and Legionellales from human nasal samples of healthy volunteers vol.60, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12223-015-0378-y
  7. Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumoniae: a comparative study in patients with nasal polyposis and healthy controls vol.129, pp.9, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022215115001590
  8. Comparison of serological methods with PCR-based methods for the diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia caused by atypical bacteria vol.15, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12952-016-0047-y
  9. PREVALENCE OF ATYPICAL BACTERIAL PNEUMONIA IN PATIENTS PRESENTING WITH LOWER RESPIRATORY TRACT INFECTIONS AT A TERTIARY CARE CENTRE vol.6, pp.20, 2012, https://doi.org/10.14260/jemds/2017/349
  10. Diagnosing Viral and Atypical Pathogens in the Setting of Community-Acquired Pneumonia vol.38, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccm.2016.11.004
  11. Mycoplasma pneumoniae from the Respiratory Tract and Beyond vol.30, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.00114-16
  12. Comparison of sputum microbiome of legionellosis-associated patients and other pneumonia patients: indications for polybacterial infections vol.7, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep40114
  13. Description et place des techniques bactériologiques dans la prise en charge des infections pulmonaires vol.34, pp.10, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmr.2016.07.007
  14. Evaluation of EuDx™-PN MLC Detection Kit for Detection ofMycoplasma pneumoniae,Chlamydophila pneumoniae, andLegionella pneumophilain Respiratory Specimens vol.20, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.5145/acm.2017.20.4.97
  15. Epidemiology and Molecular Identification and Characterization of Mycoplasma pneumoniae , South Africa, 2012–2015 vol.24, pp.3, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2403.162052
  16. Guideline for Antibiotic Use in Adults with Community-acquired Pneumonia vol.50, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3947/ic.2018.50.2.160
  17. Genotyping and macrolide resistance of Mycoplasma pneumoniae identified in children with community-acquired pneumonia in Medellín, Colombia vol.66, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2017.11.019
  18. Respiratory infections in elderly people: Viral role in a resident population of elderly care centers in Lisbon, winter 2013–2014 vol.69, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2018.01.012
  19. Laboratory methods for case finding in human psittacosis outbreaks: a systematic review vol.18, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-018-3317-0
  20. Multicenter Evaluation of BioFire FilmArray Respiratory Panel 2 for Detection of Viruses and Bacteria in Nasopharyngeal Swab Samples vol.56, pp.6, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01945-17
  21. Diagnostic performance of multiplex PCR on pulmonary samples versus nasopharyngeal aspirates in community-acquired severe lower respiratory tract infections vol.108, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2018.08.001
  22. Rapid Detection of Respiratory Pathogens for Community-Acquired Pneumonia by Capillary Electrophoresis-Based Multiplex PCR vol.24, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1177/2472630318787452
  23. Mycoplasma pneumoniae detection in children with respiratory tract infections and influence on management – a retrospective cohort study in Switzerland vol.109, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1111/apa.14891
  24. Multicenter Evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx Respiratory Panel for Detection of Viruses and Bacteria in Nasopharyngeal Swab Specimens vol.58, pp.5, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00155-20
  25. Respiratory pathogen diversity and co-infections in rural Zambia vol.102, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.10.054
  26. Real-world antibiotic use in treating acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in China: Evidence from the ACURE study vol.12, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.649884
  27. Evaluation of the Genmark ePlex® and QIAstat-Dx® respiratory pathogen panels in detecting bacterial targets in lower respiratory tract specimens vol.21, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12866-021-02289-w