Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2025
Development and Validation of In-House Conventional and Multiplex PCR Methods for the Detection and Identification of Lophomonas spp.: An Innovative Approach.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nakhaei Maryam, Fakhar Mahdi, Bagheri Abouzar, Ziaei Hezarjaribi Hajar, Abediankenari Saied, Sharifpour Ali, Ghasemi Maryam
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary lophomoniasis is an emerging disease caused by the protozoan pathogen Lophomonas spp. Recently, a conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method has been developed. However, its sensitivity and specificity remain to be fully established. Therefore, this study aimed to develop in-house conventional and multiplex PCR for the detection and identification of Lophomonas infections. Additionally, we attempted to compare the diagnostic performance of these novel PCR tests with the current microscopic examination method using BAL samples.
METHODS: We studied 120 bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) specimens of the patients clinically suspected of having lophomoniasis. The specimens were examined using three methods: microscopic examination (Giemsa staining), in-house conventional PCR, and multiplex-PCR. Moreover, multiplex-PCR was used for the simultaneous identification of two species of Lophomonas.
RESULTS: Out of the 120 BAL specimens tested, 30 (25%) tested positive through microscopic wet mount examination. Among the three techniques, multiplex-PCR was the most sensitive (100%, 95% CI, 88.3-100), while Giemsa staining had the lowest sensitivity (86.2%, 95% CI, 69.4-94.5). The data reveal a strong agreement between multiplex-PCR and conventional PCR (κ = 0.96), while the lowest agreement was found between multiplex-PCR and microscopy methods (κ = 0.16). The study also confirmed the presence of L. blattarum species in all samples using multiplex-PCR.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the in-house multiplex-PCR is a robust and accurate diagnostic test for the detection and identification of Lophomonas species. Therefore, our findings suggest that this method may be a powerful tool to overcome some diagnostic pitfalls for lophomoniasis.
METHODS: We studied 120 bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) specimens of the patients clinically suspected of having lophomoniasis. The specimens were examined using three methods: microscopic examination (Giemsa staining), in-house conventional PCR, and multiplex-PCR. Moreover, multiplex-PCR was used for the simultaneous identification of two species of Lophomonas.
RESULTS: Out of the 120 BAL specimens tested, 30 (25%) tested positive through microscopic wet mount examination. Among the three techniques, multiplex-PCR was the most sensitive (100%, 95% CI, 88.3-100), while Giemsa staining had the lowest sensitivity (86.2%, 95% CI, 69.4-94.5). The data reveal a strong agreement between multiplex-PCR and conventional PCR (κ = 0.96), while the lowest agreement was found between multiplex-PCR and microscopy methods (κ = 0.16). The study also confirmed the presence of L. blattarum species in all samples using multiplex-PCR.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the in-house multiplex-PCR is a robust and accurate diagnostic test for the detection and identification of Lophomonas species. Therefore, our findings suggest that this method may be a powerful tool to overcome some diagnostic pitfalls for lophomoniasis.