Conventional PCR versus Culture Method to Detect Common Fungal Pathogens in Patients with Respiratory Diseases

H. Rashied, A. Al-Attraqchi, Amar Kasim Muhmmed
{"title":"Conventional PCR versus Culture Method to Detect Common Fungal Pathogens in Patients with Respiratory Diseases","authors":"H. Rashied, A. Al-Attraqchi, Amar Kasim Muhmmed","doi":"10.48112/bcs.v1i4.235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study aimed to assess the frequency of invasive fungal infection in patients with respiratory diseases by conventional and molecular methods. This study included 117 Broncho alveolar lavage (BAL) samples were collected from patients with respiratory disease (79 male and 38 female) with ages ranged between (20-80) years, who attended Medicine Baghdad Teaching hospital and AL-Emamain AL-Khadhymian Medical City, during the period from September 2019 to April 2020. The results in PCR versus culture methods in this study showed that out of 117 samples of fungal infections 30(25.6 %) were detected by culture method, while the 24(20.5%) samples were detected by PCR technique, the most commonly diagnosed pathogenic fungi is Candida spp. followed by Aspergillus spp. By considering the culture method as a gold standard against the PCR technique, the results show that the sensitivity and specificity of PCR were (86.6%) and (100%) respectively.","PeriodicalId":176903,"journal":{"name":"Biomedicine and Chemical Sciences","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomedicine and Chemical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.48112/bcs.v1i4.235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The study aimed to assess the frequency of invasive fungal infection in patients with respiratory diseases by conventional and molecular methods. This study included 117 Broncho alveolar lavage (BAL) samples were collected from patients with respiratory disease (79 male and 38 female) with ages ranged between (20-80) years, who attended Medicine Baghdad Teaching hospital and AL-Emamain AL-Khadhymian Medical City, during the period from September 2019 to April 2020. The results in PCR versus culture methods in this study showed that out of 117 samples of fungal infections 30(25.6 %) were detected by culture method, while the 24(20.5%) samples were detected by PCR technique, the most commonly diagnosed pathogenic fungi is Candida spp. followed by Aspergillus spp. By considering the culture method as a gold standard against the PCR technique, the results show that the sensitivity and specificity of PCR were (86.6%) and (100%) respectively.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
常规PCR与培养法检测呼吸道疾病患者常见真菌病原体的比较
本研究旨在通过常规方法和分子方法评估呼吸道疾病患者侵袭性真菌感染的频率。本研究包括从2019年9月至2020年4月期间在巴格达医学教学医院和AL-Emamain AL-Khadhymian医疗城就诊的年龄在(20-80)岁之间的呼吸系统疾病患者(男性79名,女性38名)收集的117份支气管肺泡灌洗(BAL)样本。本研究PCR法与培养法对比结果显示,117份真菌感染样品中,培养法检出30份(25.6%),PCR法检出24份(20.5%),其中最常见的病原真菌是念珠菌,其次是曲霉,以培养法作为对照PCR技术的金标准,结果显示PCR的敏感性为86.6%,特异性为100%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Electrochemical Effect of Omega 3 Fatty Acid in Milk at Different Temperatures by Cyclic Voltammetry Electrochemical Analysis of CuO NPs in Artificial Saliva at Different Concentrations, pH, and Scan Rates Using Cyclic Voltammetry Watery Diarrhea of Cryptosporidium in Paediatrics Assessment of Antibacterial Activity in Vitro Eco-Friendly Synthesis and Characterization of Silver Nanoparticles Malathion-induced Biochemical and Molecular Changes in the Brain of Danio rerio as Biomarkers of Oxidative Stress Damage
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1