Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/114948
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHarris, R.-
dc.contributor.authorMarmion, B.P.-
dc.contributor.authorVarkanis, G.-
dc.contributor.authorKok, T.-
dc.contributor.authorLunn, B.-
dc.contributor.authorMartin, J.-
dc.date.issued1988-
dc.identifier.citationEpidemiology and Infection, 1988; 101(3):685-694-
dc.identifier.issn0950-2688-
dc.identifier.issn1469-4409-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/114948-
dc.description.abstractThe efficiency of the direct detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae in respiratory exudates by an antigen capture, indirect enzyme immunoassay (Ag-EIA), has been compared with its detection with a cDNA probe ('Gen-Probe assay') directed against the specific ribosomal RNA sequences of the organism ('Mycoplasma pneumoniae Rapid Diagnostic System', Gen-Probe, San Diego, California). Both assays showed excellent specificity against a range of mycoplasma species suspended in negative nasopharyngeal aspirates; only M. pneumoniae and M. genitalium reacted. In experiments with graded doses of viable M. pneumoniae cells suspended in negative nasopharyngeal aspirate, the Gen-Probe assay was more sensitive than Ag-EIA; detection limits were respectively 2 X 10(3) c.f.u./ml (3.2 X 10(5) genomes) and 2.5 X 10(4) c.f.u./ml (4 X 10(6) genomes); detection levels 10-100 times less sensitive than culture. The two assays were also tested on nasopharyngeal aspirates or sputum specimens from 90 patients with respiratory infection; 67 of these were culture- or seronegative for M. pneumoniae and 23 were culture- or seropositive. Ag-EIA detected 21 (91%) of the latter but the Gen-Probe assay detected only 5 (22%). Both assays were negative with the 67 culture-/sero-negatives; there were no Gen-Probe assay positive/Ag-EIA negatives. Overall, it is concluded that although Ag-EIA and the Gen-Probe assay are effective substitutes for culture as a diagnostic procedure, there is a significant problem with samples which are culture-negative and from patients who have good serological evidence of current infection. Possible reasons for the disparity between the two assays are advanced.-
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityR. Harris, B. P. Marmion, G. Varkanis, T. Kok, B. Lunn, and J. Martin-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherCambridge University Press-
dc.rights© Cambridge University Press 1988-
dc.source.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0950268800029563-
dc.subjectMycoplasma pneumoniae-
dc.subjectDNA Probes-
dc.subjectRNA, Ribosomal-
dc.titleLaboratory diagnosis of Mycoplasma pneumoniae infection: 2. Comparison of methods for the direct detection of specific antigen or nucleic acid sequences in respiratory exudates-
dc.typeJournal article-
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/S0950268800029563-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest 8
Medicine publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.