Application of Polymerase Chain Reaction in Diphtheria Laboratory Examination: A Field Need
Open Access
- 11 September 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Briefland in Jundishapur Journal of Microbiology
- Vol. 14 (7)
- https://doi.org/10.5812/jjm.117884
Abstract
Background: Indonesia is one of the five countries with the highest number of diphtheria cases worldwide. Diphtheria is caused by the toxigenic strains Corynebacterium diphtheriae, C. ulcerans, and C. pseudotuberculosis. The diphtheria-causing bacteria can be identified using conventional and molecular methods, including polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay. We used the PCR assay as additional testing, because in island countries like Indonesia, specimen transport is a serious challenge to maintaining bacterial survival. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the PCR assay as additional testing to identify diphtheria-causing bacteria in the diphtheria laboratory. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, a total of 178 pairs of the throat and nasal swabs from diphtheria suspected cases and close contacts were collected from seven provinces in Indonesia in 2016. All samples were directly identified by the conventional method and multiplex PCR assay. Statistical analysis was conducted using the 2 × 2 tables to determine the sensitivity and specificity of both methods, while the χ2 test was used to examine the correlation between specimen examination delay and the differentiation of results. A P-value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: Out of 178 examined samples, eight samples were identified as diphtheria-positive by both the conventional method and PCR assay, while nine samples were only detected by the PCR assay. All diphtheria-causing bacteria found in the positive samples were toxigenic C. diphtheriae. The diphtheria-causing bacteria were found in 27.6% of cases and 6.0% of close contacts using the PCR assay versus 13.8% of cases and 2.7% of close contacts using the conventional method. Statistical analysis showed that the PCR assay is about twice more sensitive than the conventional method. There was a significant correlation between the differentiation of results and > 72 hours’ specimen examination delay with a P-value of 0.04 (< 0.05). Conclusions: The PCR assay is more sensitive than the conventional method to identify diphtheria-causing bacteria and may be applied as additional testing to increase the positivity rate of diphtheria-confirmed cases in Indonesia as an archipelago country where geographical factors and specimen transport are real obstacles.Keywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Emergence and molecular characterisation of non-toxigenic tox gene-bearing Corynebacterium diphtheriae biovar mitis in the United Kingdom, 2003–2012Eurosurveillance, 2014
- Detection Methods for Laboratory Diagnosis of DiphtheriaPublished by Springer Science and Business Media LLC ,2013
- Diphtheria in the Postepidemic Period, Europe, 2000–2009Emerging Infectious Diseases, 2012
- Difteria pelo Corynebacterium ulcerans: uma zoonose emergente no Brasil e no mundoRevista de Saúde Pública, 2011
- Strain-specific differences in pili formation and the interaction of Corynebacterium diphtheriae with host cellsBMC Microbiology, 2010
- Current Approaches to the Laboratory Diagnosis of DiphtheriaThe Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2000
- Diphtheria: Changing patterns in the developing world and the industrialized worldEuropean Journal of Epidemiology, 1995
- Evaluation of API Coryne system for identifying coryneform bacteria.Journal of Clinical Pathology, 1994
- Polymerase chain reaction for screening clinical isolates of corynebacteria for the production of diphtheria toxin.Journal of Clinical Pathology, 1994
- Diphtheria Carriers and the Effect of Erythromycin TherapyAntimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 1974