Neisseria Species Identification Assay for the Confirmation of Neisseria gonorrhoeae -Positive Results of the COBAS Amplicor PCR

Validation of a laboratory-developed real-time PCR protocol for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in urine

“…The porA PCR was found to be more sensitive and specific than the COBAS Amplicor NG test, which has previously been shown to generate a considerable number of inhibitory or reactive results that could not be confirmed, and our findings support this (table 4). The NSppID assay has been reported as a useful confirmation test to improve the specificity of the COBAS NG assay 12. However, NSppID assay sensitivity was limited in comparison with the NG-OPA confirmation PCR and an NG-OPA /16s rDNA duplex assay was subsequently adopted as the confirmation assay to complement the LDQA (porA) screen.…”

“…Published PCR directed towards the Neisseria 16S rRNA gene ( NSppID ), and the opacity protein gene ( NG-OPA ) were used to confirm the presence of N gonorrhoeae DNA in any sample identified as positive, inhibitory or grey zone by the COBAS Amplicor NG test or LDQA 12 13. The NSppID assay was run as described previously but was later replaced with the NG-OPA PCR multiplexed with a 16s rDNA PCR for post-implementation confirmation of the LDQA (table 1).…”

Intraspecific 16S rRNA gene diversity among clinical isolates ofNeisseriaspecies

“…In this framework, the use of another identification method than 16S rRNA gene sequencing could lead to discrepancies in data. Indeed, no ideal ‘gold standard’ is available and commonly used for speciation of Neisseria .…”

Case report of bacteremia due to Neisseria mucosa

“…Some laboratories rely on the 16S rRNA gene sequencing to resolve this issue . Until now, no accurate ideal ‘gold standard’ is available and commonly used for speciation of Neisseria . Recently, Bennett et al.…”