Search

Objective: A multiplex extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-E) quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), performed directly on rectal swabs, was compared with a culture-based protocol to study the discrepancies between the two methods, and identify existing challenges to apply this assay in routine clinical practice. The secondary objective was to assess the performance of the qPCR., Materials and Methods: In two Dutch teaching hospitals, 573 rectal swabs were collected prospectively. Culture with additional testing with the Check-MDR CT103XL (Check-Points) was compared with the Check-Direct ESBL Screen for BD MAX (Check-Points), which detects the presence of the ESBL gene families CTX-M1, CTX-M2, CTX-M9 and SHV2/5-ESBL. The culture-based protocol (with Brilliance agar) was considered as the gold standard to assess the performance of the qPCR., Results: Of the 573 rectal swabs, 74 (12.9%) were culture-positive. Eighty-four (14.7%) were qPCR-positive. There were eight culture-positive/qPCR-negative discrepancies and 18 culture-negative/qPCR-positive discrepancies. Sensitivity and specificity of qPCR vs culture were 87.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 79.7-95.7] and 96.3% (95% CI 94.6-98.0), respectively., Conclusion: The Check-Direct ESBL Screen for the BD MAX is an easy-to-perform, quick molecular diagnostic test with the potential to significantly speed up screening for rectal ESBL-E carriage. Discrepancies were observed between the culture-based protocol and the qPCR in 4.5% of tested samples. Existing challenges for implementing qPCR are its limited sensitivity, the need for thorough knowledge of the local ESBL-E genes, and interpretation of culture-negative but qPCR-positive samples. It is believed that the limited sensitivity of qPCR could be optimized by including bla TEM as a molecular target, and improving the limit of detection., (Copyright © 2017 The Healthcare Infection Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In the Netherlands, there is an ongoing and unparalleled outbreak of Q fever. Rapid and reliable methods to identify patients infected with Coxiella burnetii, the causative agent of Q fever, are urgently needed. We evaluated the performance of different DNA extraction methods and real-time PCR assays that are in use in seven diagnostic or reference laboratories in the Netherlands. A low degree of variation in the sensitivities of most of the developed real-time PCR assays was observed. However, PCR assays amplifying short DNA fragments yielded better results than those producing large DNA fragments. With regard to DNA extraction, the automated MagNA Pure Compact system and the manual QIAamp DNA mini kit consistently yielded better results than either the MagNA Pure LC system and NucliSens EasyMag (both automated) or the High Pure viral nucleic acid kit (manual). The present study shows that multiple combinations of DNA extraction kits and real-time PCR assays offer equivalent solutions to detect C. burnetii DNA in serum samples from patients suspected to have Q fever.