Abstract
Evaluation of 16S PCR in addition to the standard culture to improve the pathogen detection rate in clinical specimens. Microbiological culture and direct 16S PCR was performed on specimens from suspected prosthetic joint infection patients (cohort-1) and on tissues and fluids from other normally sterile body sites (cohort-2). Based on clinical and microbiological data, the detection rate for both methods was assessed, assuming no superiority of either 16S PCR or culture. In cohort-1, 469 specimens were obtained. Culture was positive in 170 (36·2%) specimens, 16S PCR detected 70 (41·2%) of those pathogens. Additionally, 16S PCR detected pathogens in 13 of 299 (4·3%) culture-negative specimens. In cohort-2, pathogens were cultured in 52 of 430 (12·1%) specimens and 16S PCR revealed those pathogens in 32 (61·5%) specimens. 16S PCR detected pathogens in 31 of 378 (8·2%) culture-negative specimens. Overall, the yield with 16S PCR was low. For cohort-1 16S PCR detected pathogens in 4·3% of culture-negative specimens, where this was 8·2% for cohort-2. Although direct 16S PCR cannot replace culture, it may offer a valuable additional diagnostic option for detection of difficult to culture micro-organisms in culture-negative clinical specimens.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
