Advertisement

Comparison of nasopharyngeal aspirates and throat swab specimens in a polymerase chain reaction-based test forMycoplasma pneumoniae

  • M. Reznikov
  • T. K. Blackmore
  • J. J. Finlay-Jones
  • D. L. Gordon
Notes

Abstract

Nasopharyngeal aspirates and throat swab specimens were compared in a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based test forMycoplasma pneumoniae. The pathogen was detected in 50 % and 45 % of throat swab specimens and aspirates, respectively. However, in specimens negative forMycoplasma pneumoniae by PCR, amplification inhibitors were detected in 0 % and 36 % of throat specimens and aspirates, respectively. Further investigations confirmed that no throat specimens, but one-quarter of aspirates, are likely to be rejected for containing inadequate respiratory material or excess amplification inhibitors. Because rejection of most of the unsuitable specimens is possible only after PCR, the use of aspirates is less cost-effective. This, and the reluctance to subject patients to aspiration, make the aspirate an inferior specimen for detection ofMycoplasma pneumoniae by PCR.

Keywords

Polymerase Chain Reaction Internal Medicine Throat Swab Swab Specimen Nasopharyngeal Aspirate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kok TW, Varkanis G, Marmion BP, Martin J, Esterman A: Laboratory diagnosis ofMycoplasma pneumoniae infection. 1. Direct detection of antigen in respiratory exudates by enzyme immunoassay. Epidemiology and Infection 1988, 101: 669–684.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T: Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, New York, 1989, Book 3, Appendix E10–13.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buck GE, O'Hara LC, Summersgill JT: Rapid, sensitive detection ofMycoplasma pneumoniae in simulated clinical specimens by DNA amplification. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1992, 30: 3280–3283.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bevan IS, Daw RA, Day PJR, Ala FA, Walker MR: Polymerase chain reaction for detection of human cytomegalovirus infection in a blood donor population. British Journal of Haematology 1991, 78: 94–99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kwok S, Higuchi R: Avoiding false positives with PCR. Nature 1989, 339: 237–238.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Skakni L, Sardet A, Just J, Landman-Parker J, Costil J, Moniot-Ville N, Bricout F, Garbarg-Chenon A: Detection ofMycoplasma pneumoniae in clinical samples from pediatric patients by polymerase chain reaction. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1992, 30: 2638–2643.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Luneberg E, Jensen JS, Frosch M: Detection ofMycoplasma pneumoniae by polymerase chain reaction and nonradioactive hybridization in microtiter plates. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1993, 31: 1088–1094.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tjhie JH, van Kuppeveld FJM, Roosendaal R, Melchers WJG, Gordijn R, MacLaren DM, Walboomers JMM, Meijer CJLM, van den Brule AJC: Direct PCR enables detection ofMycoplasma pneumoniae in patients with respiratory tract infections. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1994, 32: 11–16.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlagsgesellschaft mbH 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Reznikov
    • 1
  • T. K. Blackmore
    • 1
  • J. J. Finlay-Jones
    • 1
  • D. L. Gordon
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Microbiology and Infectious DiseasesFlinders Medical CentreBedford ParkAustralia

Personalised recommendations