Comparison of manual and automated nucleic acid extraction methods from clinical specimens for microbial diagnosis purposes
| Autor: | Francia Sanhueza, Patricia García, Claudia Castillo, Carolina Miranda, Aniela Wozniak, Enrique Geoffroy |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2016 |
| Předmět: |
Automation
Laboratory 0301 basic medicine Microbiology (medical) Cycle threshold Reduced risk Chromatography 030106 microbiology Extraction (chemistry) General Medicine Biology Communicable Diseases Specimen Handling Microbiology 03 medical and health sciences 030104 developmental biology Infectious Diseases Molecular Diagnostic Techniques Nucleic Acids Nucleic acid Humans Extraction methods |
| Zdroj: | Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease. 86:268-269 |
| ISSN: | 0732-8893 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2016.07.008 |
| Popis: | The choice of nucleic acids (NAs) extraction method for molecular diagnosis in microbiology is of major importance because of the low microbial load, different nature of microorganisms, and clinical specimens. The NA yield of different extraction methods has been mostly studied using spiked samples. However, information from real human clinical specimens is scarce. The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of a manual low-cost extraction method (Qiagen kit or salting-out extraction method) with the automated high-cost MagNAPure Compact method. According to cycle threshold values for different pathogens, MagNAPure is as efficient as Qiagen for NA extraction from noncomplex clinical specimens (nasopharyngeal swab, skin swab, plasma, respiratory specimens). In contrast, according to cycle threshold values for RNAseP, MagNAPure method may not be an appropriate method for NA extraction from blood. We believe that MagNAPure versatility reduced risk of cross-contamination and reduced hands-on time compensates its high cost. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect