We report a study of 1,953 patients whose laboratory records from 1972 through 1983 at the Massachusetts Mycobacteria Reference Laboratory indicated the isolation of Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) organisms. At least one clinical specimen from each patient during this period exhibited the organism. The incidence of isolation of MAC has increased fivefold since 1972, with a doubling of the number of patients with positive MAC specimens from normally sterile sites occurring since 1980. A concomitant increase of more than fourfold in otbier nontuberculous mycobacteria has occurred. Most isolates came from high-density population centers. Communities whose drinking water comes from a distant rather than a local source were more likely to have patients with MAC.
Commercial DNA probes (Gen-Probe Corp., San Diego, Calif.) for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex Mycobacterium avium, and Mycobacterium intracellulare were compared with conventional methods for accuracy, applicability, and speed for the identification of putative isolates of the M. tuberculosis and M. avium complexes. Results are expressed as percent hybridization. Values of >15% were considered positive, and values of <5% were negative. Cultures having hybridization values within an indeterminate range of 5 to 15% were repeated. Mycobacterial isolates resembling M. tuberculosis and M. avium complex from cultures of 589 specimens, representing 432 patients, were entered into this study; 294 cultures were tested with the M. tuberculosis complex probe, and 326 cultures were tested with the M. avium probe. In ail cases, probe results agreed with our biochemical identification of the isolates. The M. intracellulare probe was used with 117 isolates morphologically resembling M. avium complex, and one false-negative result was observed. Seventy-two cultures gave initial hybridization results that fell within the indeterminate range and were repeated. If the manufacturer's recommended 10% cutoff value had been used, the original hybridization values would have resulted in 27 misidentified cultures, 16 false-negatives and Il false-positives. In this report we describe the diagnostic evaluation of the Gen-Probe Rapid Diagnostic Systems (Gen-Probe Corp., San Diego, Calif.) assay for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex and Mycobacterium avium complex in culture. The M. tuberculosis complex system detects M. tuberculosis, M. bovis, M. bovis BCG, M. africanum, and M. microti; the M. avium complex system distinguishes between M. avium and M. intracellulare. These assays are based on the ability of single complementary nucleic acid strands to hybridize and form stable double strands under appropriate conditions. The assays employ DNA probes complementary to the corresponding rRNA. The objectives were (i) to compare the results of culture confirmation by nucleic acid hybridization probe with the results of our classical biochemical methods of identification (specificity), (ii) to evaluate the sensitivity of probes compared with biochemical methods, and (iii) to determine how much sooner the final results would be available with DNA technology. MATERIALS AND METHODS DNA probe test. All materials, lysing reagent, probe solutions, hydroxyapatite separation suspension, and wash solution, were obtained in kit form. The Gen-Probe Rapid Diagnostic Systems kit for M. tuberculosis complex contained only the M. tuberculosis complex probe solution; the M. avium complex kit contained probe solutions for both M. avium and M. intracellulare. Control organisms. Positive controls included with the appropriate probes were M. tuberculosis H37Rv and ATCC 25618, M. avium serotype 4 (laboratory isolate), and M. intracellulare (laboratory isolate). These same organisms also were run as negative controls, i.e., M. avium was used with the M. tuberculo...
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.