Abstract

Optimal clinical decision-making depends on identification of clinically relevant organisms present in a sample. Standard microbiological culture may fail to identify unusual or fastidious organisms and can misrepresent relative abundance of sample constituents. Culture-independent methods have improved our ability to deconvolute polymicrobial patient samples. We used next-generation 16S rRNA gene sequencing (NGS16S) to determine how often cultivatable organisms in complex polymicrobial samples are not reported by standard culture. Twenty consecutive bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples were plated to standard and additional media; bacteria were identified by NGS16S analysis of DNA extracted directly from samples or from washed culture plates. 96% of organisms identified were cultivable, but only 21% were reported by standard culture, indicating that standard work-up provides an incomplete assessment of microbial constituents. Direct NGS16S correlated well with standard culture, identifying the same predominant organism in 50% of samples. When predominant organisms differed, NGS16S most often detected anaerobes, whose growth is unsupported by standard culture conditions for this specimen. NGS16S identified more organisms per sample and allowed identification of fastidious organisms, while culture was better at capturing organisms when bacterial load was low, and allowed incidental recovery of non-bacterial pathogens. Molecular and culture-based methods together detect more organisms than either method alone.

Highlights

  • Optimal clinical decision-making depends on identification of clinically relevant organisms present in a sample

  • Using synthetic polymicrobial samples of defined composition, we have shown that NGS16S analysis more accurately catalogs the bacterial contents of polymicrobial samples than standard culture[14]

  • We found that NGS16S identifies more organisms per sample and allows identification of fastidious organisms, while culture is better at capturing organisms when bacterial load is low and allows incidental recovery of non-bacterial pathogens such as yeast or molds

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Optimal clinical decision-making depends on identification of clinically relevant organisms present in a sample. NGS16S identified more organisms per sample and allowed identification of fastidious organisms, while culture was better at capturing organisms when bacterial load was low, and allowed incidental recovery of non-bacterial pathogens. We found that NGS16S identifies more organisms per sample and allows identification of fastidious organisms, while culture is better at capturing organisms when bacterial load is low and allows incidental recovery of non-bacterial pathogens such as yeast or molds. Both methods together detected more organisms in clinical samples than either method alone

Methods
Results
Conclusion

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.