Comparison of Quantitative Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction (qRT-PCR) and Agglutination Assays in Diagnosis of Brucellosis in Golestan Province, North of Iran

B. Khodabakhshi, Abdollah Abbasi, Mobina Torabi Rostami, H. Joshaghani, G. Roshandel
{"title":"Comparison of Quantitative Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction (qRT-PCR) and Agglutination Assays in Diagnosis of Brucellosis in Golestan Province, North of Iran","authors":"B. Khodabakhshi, Abdollah Abbasi, Mobina Torabi Rostami, H. Joshaghani, G. Roshandel","doi":"10.29252/jommid.7.4.116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The clinical symptoms of brucellosis are similar to a wide range of diseases; hence, reliable diagnostic and laboratory methods are required to identify the causative agent. Iran is an endemic region of brucellosis, and many patients are misdiagnosed due to the nature of the infection. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare the use of the conventional Wright test and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) for the diagnosis of brucellosis. Methods: Diagnosis of brucellosis was performed using serological tests and PCR amplification of a gene encoding 31-kDa immunogenic Brucella abortus protein (BCSP31). Data were analyzed using the Chi-square test. Results: Brucellosis was diagnosed in 45 (69.23%) and 22 (38.8%) patients using the Wright test and qRT-PCR, respectively. The results of Wright and qRT-PCR assays were consistent in patients with negative results (90%). Moreover, qRT-PCR detected brucellosis in 25% of patients with Wright test titers <1/160, while 55.2% of the patients were positive with titers ≥1/160. No significant association was detected between positive PCR results and age, gender, and clinical symptoms. Conclusion: qRT-PCR showed a reliable diagnostic method capable of detecting the infection in suspected individuals with negative Wright results or with Wright test titers <1/160. Also, the positive qRT-PCR assays were in agreement with the Wright test titer. Regarding the financial and availability issues as well as technical problems, the agglutination test remains the preferred method in Iran.","PeriodicalId":34460,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29252/jommid.7.4.116","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The clinical symptoms of brucellosis are similar to a wide range of diseases; hence, reliable diagnostic and laboratory methods are required to identify the causative agent. Iran is an endemic region of brucellosis, and many patients are misdiagnosed due to the nature of the infection. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare the use of the conventional Wright test and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) for the diagnosis of brucellosis. Methods: Diagnosis of brucellosis was performed using serological tests and PCR amplification of a gene encoding 31-kDa immunogenic Brucella abortus protein (BCSP31). Data were analyzed using the Chi-square test. Results: Brucellosis was diagnosed in 45 (69.23%) and 22 (38.8%) patients using the Wright test and qRT-PCR, respectively. The results of Wright and qRT-PCR assays were consistent in patients with negative results (90%). Moreover, qRT-PCR detected brucellosis in 25% of patients with Wright test titers <1/160, while 55.2% of the patients were positive with titers ≥1/160. No significant association was detected between positive PCR results and age, gender, and clinical symptoms. Conclusion: qRT-PCR showed a reliable diagnostic method capable of detecting the infection in suspected individuals with negative Wright results or with Wright test titers <1/160. Also, the positive qRT-PCR assays were in agreement with the Wright test titer. Regarding the financial and availability issues as well as technical problems, the agglutination test remains the preferred method in Iran.
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
实时荧光定量聚合酶链反应(qRT-PCR)与凝集检测在伊朗北部戈列斯坦省布鲁氏菌病诊断中的比较
布鲁氏菌病的临床症状与许多疾病相似;因此,需要可靠的诊断和实验室方法来确定病原体。伊朗是布鲁氏菌病的流行地区,由于感染的性质,许多患者被误诊。在这项研究中,我们旨在评估和比较传统的Wright试验和定量聚合酶链反应(qPCR)在布鲁氏菌病诊断中的应用。方法:采用血清学检测和编码31-kDa免疫原性流产布鲁氏菌蛋白(BCSP31)基因的PCR扩增对布鲁氏菌病进行诊断。数据分析采用卡方检验。结果:Wright试验和qRT-PCR诊断布鲁氏菌病分别为45例(69.23%)和22例(38.8%)。Wright和qRT-PCR检测结果在阴性患者中一致(90%)。此外,在Wright试验滴度<1/160的患者中,qRT-PCR检出25%的布鲁氏菌病,而在滴度≥1/160的患者中,55.2%的患者呈阳性。PCR阳性结果与年龄、性别和临床症状无显著相关性。结论:qRT-PCR是一种可靠的诊断方法,能够检测出Wright阴性或Wright试验滴度<1/160的疑似个体的感染。此外,qRT-PCR阳性分析结果与Wright试验滴度一致。考虑到财政和可用性问题以及技术问题,凝集试验仍然是伊朗首选的方法。
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
16
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Prevalence of Salmonella enterica Subspecies enterica Serovar Typhi (Salmonella typhi) Infection in Febrile Patients at the Sino-Gabonese Friendship Hospital in Franceville: A Two-Year Retrospective Study in South East Gabon Intraventricular Administration of Cefepime for the Treatment of Meningitis due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa A Bibliometric Analysis Study on Pregnancy and COVID-19 A Recent Profile of HIV-Positive Patients Attending an Integrated Testing and Counseling Centre (ICTC) at a Tertiary Care Center in Bangalore, India Prevalence of Extended Spectrum β-Lactamases-Producing Escherichia coli Isolated from Clinical Samples and Their Antibiotic Resistance Pattern
×
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