Comparison among three methods for mycobacteria identification

• Main Authors: Mondragón-Barreto Misael (Author), Vázquez-Chacón Carlos A. (Author), Barrón-Rivero Candelaria (Author), Acosta-Blanco Patricia (Author), Jost Jr Kenneth C. (Author), Balandrano Susana (Author), Olivera-Díaz Hiram (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, 2000-01-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.

Summary

OBJECTIVE: To compare three methods: Biochemical tests, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragments length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP), for the identification of mycobacteria, and to perform a cost-benefit analysis to define an optimum identification algorithm. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One-hundred-and-seven mycobacteria isolates were identified by the three methods at Instituto de Diagnóstico y Referencia Epidemiológicos, between February of 1999 and January of 2000 and the results were compared with those of a reference laboratory using the Q-Cochran statistical test. RESULTS: PCR-RFLP was the most rapid and specific procedure but also the most expensive; biochemical tests excelled for identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, but were lengthy and expensive for other mycobacteria; HPLC ranked in the middle for price, speed and specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the expected proportion of M. tuberculosis, the following algorithm was proposed: Initially, biochemical tests should be performed; if the results indicate a non-tuberculous mycobacteria, the isolate should be analyzed with HPLC; if results are unclear, the isolate should be analyzed using PCR-RFLP. Isolates showing a previously undescribed PCR-RFLP pattern should be characterized by DNA sequencing.

Item Description

0036-3634