Skip to main content
main-content

01.12.2017 | Research article | Ausgabe 1/2017 Open Access

BMC Clinical Pathology 1/2017

Utilizing BD MAX™ Enteric Bacterial Panel to Detect Stool Pathogens from Rectal Swabs

Zeitschrift:
BMC Clinical Pathology > Ausgabe 1/2017
Autoren:
Barbara DeBurger, Sarah Hanna, Eleanor A. Powell, Cindi Ventrola, Joel E. Mortensen

Abstract

Background

The BD MAX™ Enteric Bacterial Panel (BDM-EBP) is designed and FDA-cleared to detect Salmonella, Shigella, Campylobacter, and Shiga toxin genes stx1/2 from stool samples. However, rectal swabs, which are not FDA-cleared for clinical testing with the BDM-EBP, are common specimens received from pediatric patients for enteric pathogen testing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of the BDM-EBP to detect stool pathogens from rectal swabs.

Methods

Routine cultures, Shiga toxin testing, and molecular testing with BDM-EBP were performed on 272 sequential rectal swabs collected from August 2015 to December 2015. Discrepant test results were resolved using Verigene® Enteric Pathogens Nucleic Acid Test (EP). 36 challenge samples (13 Salmonella spp., 3 Shigella spp., 10 Campylobacter spp., and 10 Shiga toxin positive Escherichia coli) were tested using reference strains (American Type Culture Collection) and previous patient isolates diluted to103-104 cfu/ml in saline then added to Sample Buffer Tube (SBT) with negative stool matrix delivered via a swab. Limit of detection testing was performed by serial 10 fold dilutions in saline then added to SBT with negative stool matrix provided via a swab.

Results

A total of 272 rectal swab specimens were evaluated and 89 were positive by culture and/or MAX EBP. All discrepant results were BDM-EBP positive and culture negative. 21 of 31 (68%) of the apparent false positive BDM-EBP discrepant results resolved as positive with Nanosphere’s Verigene® EP. After resolution of the discordant results, the Positive Percent Agreement (PPA) and Negative Percent Agreement (NPA) are as follows for each target: Salmonella (n = 4) 100%, PPA and 100%, NPA; Shigella (n = 79) 100%, PPA and 95.3%, NPA; Campylobacter (n = 4) 100%, PPA and 99.6%, NPA; and Shiga toxin producing organisms (n = 2) 100%, PPA and 100%, NPA. 8.8% of the patient samples did not initially yield a result on the BDM-System. Upon repeat, half of the problematic samples resolved, and 4.4% of the total specimen tested did not yield a result. All organisms in the challenge samples were detected. Limits of detection for BDM-EBP testing of rectal swabs were as follows (in cfu/ml in SBT): Salmonella-1.44 × 102; Shigella-5.10 × 100; Campylobacter-1.51 × 101; and Shiga Toxin-1.13 ×103.

Conclusion

Rectal swabs are acceptable samples for detecting Salmonella, Shigella, Campylobacter, and Shiga toxin using BDM-EBP.
Literatur
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2017

BMC Clinical Pathology 1/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Neu im Fachgebiet Pathologie

14.03.2019 | Originalien | Ausgabe 2/2019

Medikamentennachweise bei bayerischen Altenheimbewohnern – eine rechtsmedizinische Analyse

Erste Ergebnisse aus Screeninguntersuchungen an Urinproben

07.03.2019 | Mammakarzinom | CME | Ausgabe 2/2019

Update der S3-Leitlinie Mammakarzinom

Was gibt es Neues für Pathologen?

21.02.2019 | Schwerpunkt: Neuropathologie | Ausgabe 2/2019

Neuropathologie der Medulloblastome und anderer embryonaler Tumoren des ZNS

Präzisierung der Diagnostik durch Integration genetischer Marker