Detection and identification of dermatophytes based on currently available methods – a comparative study
Aims Accurate identification of dermatophytes is essential for implementing appropriate antifungal treatment and epidemiological analysis. However, the limitations of conventional diagnostics are a frequently discussed topic, and new diagnostic techniques are constantly expanding. In this study, we...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of applied microbiology 2021-01, Vol.130 (1), p.278-291 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 291 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 278 |
| container_title | Journal of applied microbiology |
| container_volume | 130 |
| creator | Gnat, S. Łagowski, D. Nowakiewicz, A. Dyląg, M. Osińska, M. Sawicki, M. |
| description | Aims
Accurate identification of dermatophytes is essential for implementing appropriate antifungal treatment and epidemiological analysis. However, the limitations of conventional diagnostics are a frequently discussed topic, and new diagnostic techniques are constantly expanding. In this study, we assess the suitability of conventional diagnostic techniques in comparison to the real‐time PCR assay and MALDI‐TOF MS in detection and identification of dermatophytes.
Methods and Results
Strains included in this study were obtained from human and animals with symptomatic, and asymptomatic infection. A direct examination revealed that 31·7 and 60·9% of samples from symptomatic patients, and 25·7 and 60% from asymptomatic animals were positive, as shown by light and fluorescence microscopy respectively. In turn, dermatophytes were isolated from 90·2 and 71·4% of these samples. The pan‐dermatophyte primers in real‐time PCR assay facilitated detection in 85·3 and 82·9% of the symptomatic and asymptomatic dermatophytoses respectively. Additionally, species‐specific PCR assays were positive in 70·7 and 37·1% of these samples. The MALDI‐TOF MS analysis yielded positive results consistent with conventional techniques in 97·2 and 72% of symptomatic and asymptomatic infections respectively.
Conclusions
Our study revealed that there is no universal diagnostic method that would be ideal in each of the cases considered. Nonetheless, conventional techniques are still the most effective and reliable tools for mycological diagnostics.
Significance and Impact of the Study
Dermatologists and veterinarians have difficulties in making a diagnosis of dermatophytoses based only on observed symptoms of fungal infections, as they mimic symptoms of other dermatoses. In this context, a comparative analysis of the results of diagnostics performed using conventional methods and new technologies are crucial for implementing these pioneer methods into routine laboratory practice. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/jam.14778 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1111_jam_14778</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2474218853</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3538-4dd1068c08ec0b7368b8af4e89095651dcc257506cad0ef15a50b04bb7b417623</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kctO3DAUhq0KVIZpF30BZIkNLAK-xJdZjihXTdVNu458OREZJfFgJ1TZ8Q68YZ8EM0O7QMIbW8efvnN0foS-UXJG8zlfm-6MlkrpT2hGuRQFk4rtbd9lIYhiB-gwpTUhlBMhP6MDzqQgXPAZWn-HAdzQhB6b3uPGQz80dePMthRq7CF2Zgib-2mAhK1J4HH-cWOMGW0nbB5N0xrbAu5guA8-4b9Pz9hgF7qNidnzCDgNo5--oP3atAm-vt1z9Pvq8tfFTbH6eX17sVwVLk-ki9J7SqR2RIMjVnGprTZ1CXpBFkIK6p1jQgkinfEEaiqMIJaU1ipbUiUZn6OTnXcTw8MIaai6JjloW9NDGFPFSsaJlDR3m6Pjd-g6jLHP02VKlYxqLXimTneUiyGlCHW1iU1n4lRRUr0GUOUAqm0AmT16M462A_-f_LfxDJzvgD9NC9PHpupu-WOnfAHuupB3</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2474218853</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Detection and identification of dermatophytes based on currently available methods – a comparative study</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Gnat, S. ; Łagowski, D. ; Nowakiewicz, A. ; Dyląg, M. ; Osińska, M. ; Sawicki, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Gnat, S. ; Łagowski, D. ; Nowakiewicz, A. ; Dyląg, M. ; Osińska, M. ; Sawicki, M.</creatorcontrib><description>Aims
Accurate identification of dermatophytes is essential for implementing appropriate antifungal treatment and epidemiological analysis. However, the limitations of conventional diagnostics are a frequently discussed topic, and new diagnostic techniques are constantly expanding. In this study, we assess the suitability of conventional diagnostic techniques in comparison to the real‐time PCR assay and MALDI‐TOF MS in detection and identification of dermatophytes.
Methods and Results
Strains included in this study were obtained from human and animals with symptomatic, and asymptomatic infection. A direct examination revealed that 31·7 and 60·9% of samples from symptomatic patients, and 25·7 and 60% from asymptomatic animals were positive, as shown by light and fluorescence microscopy respectively. In turn, dermatophytes were isolated from 90·2 and 71·4% of these samples. The pan‐dermatophyte primers in real‐time PCR assay facilitated detection in 85·3 and 82·9% of the symptomatic and asymptomatic dermatophytoses respectively. Additionally, species‐specific PCR assays were positive in 70·7 and 37·1% of these samples. The MALDI‐TOF MS analysis yielded positive results consistent with conventional techniques in 97·2 and 72% of symptomatic and asymptomatic infections respectively.
Conclusions
Our study revealed that there is no universal diagnostic method that would be ideal in each of the cases considered. Nonetheless, conventional techniques are still the most effective and reliable tools for mycological diagnostics.
Significance and Impact of the Study
Dermatologists and veterinarians have difficulties in making a diagnosis of dermatophytoses based only on observed symptoms of fungal infections, as they mimic symptoms of other dermatoses. In this context, a comparative analysis of the results of diagnostics performed using conventional methods and new technologies are crucial for implementing these pioneer methods into routine laboratory practice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1364-5072</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2672</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jam.14778</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32650353</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Animals ; Arthrodermataceae - chemistry ; Arthrodermataceae - classification ; Arthrodermataceae - genetics ; Arthrodermataceae - isolation & purification ; Assaying ; Asymptomatic ; Asymptomatic infection ; Comparative analysis ; Comparative studies ; Dermatomycoses - microbiology ; dermatophytes ; Diagnostic systems ; Diagnostic Tests, Routine ; Epidemiology ; Fluorescence ; Fluorescence microscopy ; Fungicides ; Humans ; identification ; MALDI‐TOF MS ; microscopy ; Mycological Typing Techniques - methods ; New technology ; Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction ; real‐time PCR ; Spectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization ; Veterinary surgeons</subject><ispartof>Journal of applied microbiology, 2021-01, Vol.130 (1), p.278-291</ispartof><rights>2020 The Society for Applied Microbiology</rights><rights>2020 The Society for Applied Microbiology.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 The Society for Applied Microbiology</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3538-4dd1068c08ec0b7368b8af4e89095651dcc257506cad0ef15a50b04bb7b417623</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3538-4dd1068c08ec0b7368b8af4e89095651dcc257506cad0ef15a50b04bb7b417623</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9872-0046 ; 0000-0002-7846-5444</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fjam.14778$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fjam.14778$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32650353$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gnat, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Łagowski, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nowakiewicz, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dyląg, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Osińska, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sawicki, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Detection and identification of dermatophytes based on currently available methods – a comparative study</title><title>Journal of applied microbiology</title><addtitle>J Appl Microbiol</addtitle><description>Aims
Accurate identification of dermatophytes is essential for implementing appropriate antifungal treatment and epidemiological analysis. However, the limitations of conventional diagnostics are a frequently discussed topic, and new diagnostic techniques are constantly expanding. In this study, we assess the suitability of conventional diagnostic techniques in comparison to the real‐time PCR assay and MALDI‐TOF MS in detection and identification of dermatophytes.
Methods and Results
Strains included in this study were obtained from human and animals with symptomatic, and asymptomatic infection. A direct examination revealed that 31·7 and 60·9% of samples from symptomatic patients, and 25·7 and 60% from asymptomatic animals were positive, as shown by light and fluorescence microscopy respectively. In turn, dermatophytes were isolated from 90·2 and 71·4% of these samples. The pan‐dermatophyte primers in real‐time PCR assay facilitated detection in 85·3 and 82·9% of the symptomatic and asymptomatic dermatophytoses respectively. Additionally, species‐specific PCR assays were positive in 70·7 and 37·1% of these samples. The MALDI‐TOF MS analysis yielded positive results consistent with conventional techniques in 97·2 and 72% of symptomatic and asymptomatic infections respectively.
Conclusions
Our study revealed that there is no universal diagnostic method that would be ideal in each of the cases considered. Nonetheless, conventional techniques are still the most effective and reliable tools for mycological diagnostics.
Significance and Impact of the Study
Dermatologists and veterinarians have difficulties in making a diagnosis of dermatophytoses based only on observed symptoms of fungal infections, as they mimic symptoms of other dermatoses. In this context, a comparative analysis of the results of diagnostics performed using conventional methods and new technologies are crucial for implementing these pioneer methods into routine laboratory practice.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Arthrodermataceae - chemistry</subject><subject>Arthrodermataceae - classification</subject><subject>Arthrodermataceae - genetics</subject><subject>Arthrodermataceae - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Assaying</subject><subject>Asymptomatic</subject><subject>Asymptomatic infection</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Comparative studies</subject><subject>Dermatomycoses - microbiology</subject><subject>dermatophytes</subject><subject>Diagnostic systems</subject><subject>Diagnostic Tests, Routine</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Fluorescence</subject><subject>Fluorescence microscopy</subject><subject>Fungicides</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>identification</subject><subject>MALDI‐TOF MS</subject><subject>microscopy</subject><subject>Mycological Typing Techniques - methods</subject><subject>New technology</subject><subject>Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction</subject><subject>real‐time PCR</subject><subject>Spectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization</subject><subject>Veterinary surgeons</subject><issn>1364-5072</issn><issn>1365-2672</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kctO3DAUhq0KVIZpF30BZIkNLAK-xJdZjihXTdVNu458OREZJfFgJ1TZ8Q68YZ8EM0O7QMIbW8efvnN0foS-UXJG8zlfm-6MlkrpT2hGuRQFk4rtbd9lIYhiB-gwpTUhlBMhP6MDzqQgXPAZWn-HAdzQhB6b3uPGQz80dePMthRq7CF2Zgib-2mAhK1J4HH-cWOMGW0nbB5N0xrbAu5guA8-4b9Pz9hgF7qNidnzCDgNo5--oP3atAm-vt1z9Pvq8tfFTbH6eX17sVwVLk-ki9J7SqR2RIMjVnGprTZ1CXpBFkIK6p1jQgkinfEEaiqMIJaU1ipbUiUZn6OTnXcTw8MIaai6JjloW9NDGFPFSsaJlDR3m6Pjd-g6jLHP02VKlYxqLXimTneUiyGlCHW1iU1n4lRRUr0GUOUAqm0AmT16M462A_-f_LfxDJzvgD9NC9PHpupu-WOnfAHuupB3</recordid><startdate>202101</startdate><enddate>202101</enddate><creator>Gnat, S.</creator><creator>Łagowski, D.</creator><creator>Nowakiewicz, A.</creator><creator>Dyląg, M.</creator><creator>Osińska, M.</creator><creator>Sawicki, M.</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9872-0046</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7846-5444</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202101</creationdate><title>Detection and identification of dermatophytes based on currently available methods – a comparative study</title><author>Gnat, S. ; Łagowski, D. ; Nowakiewicz, A. ; Dyląg, M. ; Osińska, M. ; Sawicki, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3538-4dd1068c08ec0b7368b8af4e89095651dcc257506cad0ef15a50b04bb7b417623</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Arthrodermataceae - chemistry</topic><topic>Arthrodermataceae - classification</topic><topic>Arthrodermataceae - genetics</topic><topic>Arthrodermataceae - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Assaying</topic><topic>Asymptomatic</topic><topic>Asymptomatic infection</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Comparative studies</topic><topic>Dermatomycoses - microbiology</topic><topic>dermatophytes</topic><topic>Diagnostic systems</topic><topic>Diagnostic Tests, Routine</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Fluorescence</topic><topic>Fluorescence microscopy</topic><topic>Fungicides</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>identification</topic><topic>MALDI‐TOF MS</topic><topic>microscopy</topic><topic>Mycological Typing Techniques - methods</topic><topic>New technology</topic><topic>Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction</topic><topic>real‐time PCR</topic><topic>Spectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization</topic><topic>Veterinary surgeons</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gnat, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Łagowski, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nowakiewicz, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dyląg, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Osińska, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sawicki, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of applied microbiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gnat, S.</au><au>Łagowski, D.</au><au>Nowakiewicz, A.</au><au>Dyląg, M.</au><au>Osińska, M.</au><au>Sawicki, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Detection and identification of dermatophytes based on currently available methods – a comparative study</atitle><jtitle>Journal of applied microbiology</jtitle><addtitle>J Appl Microbiol</addtitle><date>2021-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>130</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>278</spage><epage>291</epage><pages>278-291</pages><issn>1364-5072</issn><eissn>1365-2672</eissn><abstract>Aims
Accurate identification of dermatophytes is essential for implementing appropriate antifungal treatment and epidemiological analysis. However, the limitations of conventional diagnostics are a frequently discussed topic, and new diagnostic techniques are constantly expanding. In this study, we assess the suitability of conventional diagnostic techniques in comparison to the real‐time PCR assay and MALDI‐TOF MS in detection and identification of dermatophytes.
Methods and Results
Strains included in this study were obtained from human and animals with symptomatic, and asymptomatic infection. A direct examination revealed that 31·7 and 60·9% of samples from symptomatic patients, and 25·7 and 60% from asymptomatic animals were positive, as shown by light and fluorescence microscopy respectively. In turn, dermatophytes were isolated from 90·2 and 71·4% of these samples. The pan‐dermatophyte primers in real‐time PCR assay facilitated detection in 85·3 and 82·9% of the symptomatic and asymptomatic dermatophytoses respectively. Additionally, species‐specific PCR assays were positive in 70·7 and 37·1% of these samples. The MALDI‐TOF MS analysis yielded positive results consistent with conventional techniques in 97·2 and 72% of symptomatic and asymptomatic infections respectively.
Conclusions
Our study revealed that there is no universal diagnostic method that would be ideal in each of the cases considered. Nonetheless, conventional techniques are still the most effective and reliable tools for mycological diagnostics.
Significance and Impact of the Study
Dermatologists and veterinarians have difficulties in making a diagnosis of dermatophytoses based only on observed symptoms of fungal infections, as they mimic symptoms of other dermatoses. In this context, a comparative analysis of the results of diagnostics performed using conventional methods and new technologies are crucial for implementing these pioneer methods into routine laboratory practice.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>32650353</pmid><doi>10.1111/jam.14778</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9872-0046</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7846-5444</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1364-5072 |
| ispartof | Journal of applied microbiology, 2021-01, Vol.130 (1), p.278-291 |
| issn | 1364-5072 1365-2672 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1111_jam_14778 |
| source | Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Animals Arthrodermataceae - chemistry Arthrodermataceae - classification Arthrodermataceae - genetics Arthrodermataceae - isolation & purification Assaying Asymptomatic Asymptomatic infection Comparative analysis Comparative studies Dermatomycoses - microbiology dermatophytes Diagnostic systems Diagnostic Tests, Routine Epidemiology Fluorescence Fluorescence microscopy Fungicides Humans identification MALDI‐TOF MS microscopy Mycological Typing Techniques - methods New technology Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction real‐time PCR Spectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization Veterinary surgeons |
| title | Detection and identification of dermatophytes based on currently available methods – a comparative study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T18%3A15%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Detection%20and%20identification%20of%20dermatophytes%20based%20on%20currently%20available%20methods%20%E2%80%93%20a%20comparative%20study&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20applied%20microbiology&rft.au=Gnat,%20S.&rft.date=2021-01&rft.volume=130&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=278&rft.epage=291&rft.pages=278-291&rft.issn=1364-5072&rft.eissn=1365-2672&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jam.14778&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2474218853%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2474218853&rft_id=info:pmid/32650353&rfr_iscdi=true |