Comparison of sample preparation methods for detection of Chlamydia pneumoniae in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid by PCR

Abstract

Amplification inhibitors can lead to false-negative results for PCR. In order to evaluate the reliability of PCR for the detection of Chlamydia pneumoniae, the presence of PCR inhibitors in 75 bronchoalveolar lavage specimens was assessed after treatment by various sample preparation methods. Specimens were collected from patients with acute respiratory infections, including four cases of proven C. pneumoniae infection. Substances inhibitory to the amplification of chlamydial DNA continued to be present in 12% of the samples treated according to the commonly used single-step proteinase K digestion and in 31% of the samples processed by heat treatment. However, the complexing of DNA-contaminating proteins and polysaccharides from digested specimens to cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) followed by DNA extraction efficiently removed inhibitors from all experimental samples and provided subsequent identification of all positive clinical samples by PCR. The CTAB method and proteinase K treatment had comparable detection limits of

Chlamydia pneumoniae infection of the central nervous system in multiple sclerosis

“…27 Equal amounts of CSF immunoglobulins were incubated with EB antigens, to control for differences in immunoglobulin concentrations in the CSF. All relapsingremitting MS patients (17 of 17) showed prominent Table 1) and 13 control patients with other neurological diseases (OND) (see Table 3; Patients 4,6,7,14,16,19,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. Lane C represents PCR products from elementary bodies of the ATCC VR-1310 strain of C pneumoniae that served as our positive internal control.…”

DNA fingerprinting reveals extensive genetic diversity in a field population of the centric diatom Ditylum brightwellii

“…Microsatellite isolation and sequencing-Total genomic DNA was extracted from the isolates, essentially as described by Maass and Dalhoff (1994). Approximately 5 ϫ 10 6 cells were filtered onto a 0.45-m cellulose filter, scraped off the filter, and either processed immediately or frozen at Ϫ70ЊC.…”

Current Methods of Laboratory Diagnosis of Chlamydia Trachomatis Infections

“…Early in the process, it was widely feared that false-positive results due to DNA contamination would impede the progress of PCR into the clinical domain. Contrary to this impression, however, experience proved that false-negatives were actually a larger problem than false-positives, due to substances commonly present in human clinical specimens that are inhibitory to the polymerase reaction (1,119,218,240). False-positive results in PCR are most likely to originate in the laboratory from poor practices such as failure to physically separate sites for reagent preparation and DNA product amplification, failure to remove gloves after handling tubes containing DNA controls or PCR products, or sloppy pipetting that results in splashover from one well to another in a microtiter well system.…”