Clinical use of capillary PCR to diagnose Mycoplasma pneumonia

41Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In the present study, serologic data were compared with data obtained by capillary PCR to establish the efficacy of capillary PCR for the determination of Mycoplasma infection in samples obtained from throat swabs, bronchoalveolar lavage fluids (BALF), and sputum of patients with Mycoplasma pneumonia. We performed PCR analysis for Mycoplasma DNA on a total of 325 samples from 197 patients with community-acquired pneumonia and in whom Mycoplasma pneumonia was suspected. There were 68 PCR-positive specimens. Review of the differences in PCR positivity rates based on the site of specimen collection showed the highest rate of detection (28.6%) from throat swabs. From among the 31 patients with significantly elevated titers of serum Mycoplasma antibodies, the PCR results were positive for 25 patients. Thus, capillary PCR had a sensitivity of 80.6% (25 of 31). Five of the six false- negative results were from throat swab specimens. Moreover, testing (PCR) had been performed only once for these five patients with false-negative results. From among the PCR-positive findings from BALF specimens, there were no false-positive results. BALF specimens were very useful, except for the technical procedures and increased patient burden required to obtain these specimens. We suggest that the use of throat swab specimens in capillary PCR is much more suitable for diagnosing Mycoplasma pneumonia in routine clinical practice; however, careful throat swab specimen collection and an increase in the number of times that the PCR is performed are necessary to reduce the rate of false-negative results.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Honda, J., Yano, T., Kusaba, M., Yonemitsu, J., Kitajima, H., Masuoka, M., … Oizumi, K. (2000). Clinical use of capillary PCR to diagnose Mycoplasma pneumonia. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 38(4), 1382–1384. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.38.4.1382-1384.2000

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free