Aims: Evaluation of 16S PCR in addition to the standard culture to improve the pathogen detection rate in clinical specimens.
Methods and results: Microbiological culture and direct 16S PCR was performed on specimens from suspected prosthetic joint infection patients (cohort-1) and on tissues and fluids from other normally sterile body sites (cohort-2). Based on clinical and microbiological data, the detection rate for both methods was assessed, assuming no superiority of either 16S PCR or culture. In cohort-1, 469 specimens were obtained. Culture was positive in 170 (36·2%) specimens, 16S PCR detected 70 (41·2%) of those pathogens. Additionally, 16S PCR detected pathogens in 13 of 299 (4·3%) culture-negative specimens. In cohort-2, pathogens were cultured in 52 of 430 (12·1%) specimens and 16S PCR revealed those pathogens in 32 (61·5%) specimens. 16S PCR detected pathogens in 31 of 378 (8·2%) culture-negative specimens.
Conclusions: Overall, the yield with 16S PCR was low. For cohort-1 16S PCR detected pathogens in 4·3% of culture-negative specimens, where this was 8·2% for cohort-2.
Significance and impact of the study: Although direct 16S PCR cannot replace culture, it may offer a valuable additional diagnostic option for detection of difficult to culture micro-organisms in culture-negative clinical specimens.
Keywords: 16S PCR; culture; detection; diagnosis; periprosthetic tissue.
© 2018 The Society for Applied Microbiology.