The prevalence levels of
Campylobacter,
Y. enterocolitica, and
C. difficile are about 10.8%, 1.2%, and 21%, respectively, in stool samples of patients with gastroenteritis in developing countries (
28-
30). These rates are lower than those reported for developed countries (
4,
31). Despite differences in geographic area and culture in these countries, inaccurate results could be obtained due to the need for individual equipment and defined culture media for the detection of these pathogens in patients’ stool samples. Because of their advantages, molecular tests are now widely used to detect these bacteria in clinical specimens. These tests are extremely useful diagnostic tools and are particularly valuable for the detection of infectious agents that are difficult to grow in conventional culture media. However, the presence of PCR inhibitors and variation of procedures that are used for sample preparation or extraction of nucleic acids affects their accuracy, precision, specificity, and sensitivity (
23). The interpretation of results for these assays should be based on their limit of detection.
In this study, analysis of culture and PCR methods for the detection of
C. jejuni showed a sensitivity limit of 10
4 and 10
2 CFU/g, respectively, for the spiked stool samples. In a study by Singh et al. (
32), higher sensitivity of PCR compared with culture method was indicated in the spiked fecal samples (
Table 3). Our results showed lower detection limits for both the culture and PCR assays compared with those reported by Persson et al. (
33) (pure culture, 10
1-2 CFU; spiked stool, 10
5 CFU/g). The obtained detection level for conventional PCR in our study was similar to those reported for
C. jejuni and
C. coli using the real-time PCR method (2.5 × 10
2 CFU/g of feces) (
34). The incongruent results could be explained as relating to differences in the primer sequences and DNA extraction methods used in this study. Recovery of
C. jejuni from stool samples may be affected by the types of culture media used. Potturi-Venkata et al. (
35) showed a higher isolation rate for modified charcoal cefoperazone deoxycholate (mCCDA) compared with Brucella agar–based media for isolation of
Campylobacter spp. from fecal samples (
Table 3).
C. jejuni is a microaerophilic bacterium that requires specific incubation conditions to grow in synthetic culture media. Although usage of an effective culture medium will improve the isolation rate of the bacterium, the need to provide microaerophilic conditions for its growth and supplements to prevent the growth of fecal microbiota are considered the main limitations of this method.
| Bacterium | Method | Results, CFU g-1/DNA Copya | References |
|---|
| Campylobacter spp. | Culture and PCR | 104/102 | This study |
| Culture and PCR | 105/102 | (33) |
| Real-time PCR | 2.5 × 102 | (36) |
| qPCR | 102 | (37) |
| Y. enterocolitica | Culture and PCR | 10/104 | This study |
| Multiplex PCR | 105 | (38) |
| Real-time PCR | 102 | (39) |
| Culture and PCR | 4 × 103/4 × 102 | (40) |
| C. difficile | Culture and PCR | 10/102 | This study |
| Real-time PCR | 5 × 104 | (41) |
| C. perfringens | Culture and PCR | 2 × 104/2 × 104 | This study |
| Multiplex PCR | 102-4 | (42) |
aCFU/g, colony forming unit/gram stool; DNA copy of target bacterium per gram stool was represented for all the molecular assays.
Alcohol pretreatment of stool specimens together with appropriate incubation time (up to 1 week) seems to be an effective method for the detection of
C. difficile spores in the stool samples (
7,
8); however, usage of other sensitive and rapid tests is preferable. In our experiment, the PCR detection limit for this bacterium was 100 CFU/g. It seems that anaerobic culture has a much lower detection limit (10 CFU/g) than PCR assay for the detection of
C. difficile. Belanger et al. (
41) used real-time PCR assay for detection of
C. difficile, and their detection limit was estimated to be as high as 5 × 10
4 CFU per gram of feces. Using the prepared dilutions of genomic DNA, an increased detection limit of up to 10 genome copies per PCR reaction was obtained in our experiment. According to these results, the incongruence of the PCR results compared with the culture results could be explained by the low yield of DNA that was extracted from the
C. difficile spores in the spiked stool samples or the existence of mutations in the cdd3 locus in the regions where our primers adhered. The existence of mutations was not supported by our data, since cdd3 was detected in the DNA extracts of diluted DNA samples at the lower concentration. In a study by Luna et al. (
43), where tcdA and tcdB were targeted in the spiked stool samples by real-time PCR, the lower limit of detection of
C. difficile was 250 CFU/mL for tcdA and 500 CFU/ml for tcdB. These researchers similarly concluded that the sensitivity of the tests can only be increased in the more concentrated samples.
Discordance between results of culture and PCR methods was also determined in the case of
Y. enterocolitica. This finding was supported by Weimer et al. (
38), who used multiplex real-time PCR for the simultaneous detection of
Y. enterocolitica and other bacteria in stool samples; they reported a sensitivity limit of 10
5 CFU/g in their research. In another study, detection limits of 10
2 CFU/mL and 10
3 CFU/g for the pure culture and stool sample, respectively, were obtained using real-time PCR (
39). However, Boyapalle et al. (
40) reported a lower detection limit for PCR (4 × 10
2 CFU/g) compared with culture method (4 × 10
3 CFU/g). The lower sensitivity of the PCR method compared with the culture method was also confirmed by the results of our assay using DNA extracts of the provided dilutions of Y. enterocolitica in PBS (71.4%, 10
3 CFU/mL). In a study by Wannet et al. (
44), those primers that targeted ail and 16s rRNA genes showed a sensitivity of 100% (one genomic copy) in pure culture of
Y. enterocolitica. Differences in the primers that target the
ompF gene for PCR and the type of DNA extraction kit used in our experiment may explain these contradictory results. Re-analysis of the tests using different primers and extraction kits will provide more accurate data about their limits of detections.
C. perfringens is not only a member of human microbiota in the gastrointestinal tract, but it is also considered as a common cause of food poisoning in foodborne outbreaks (
45). In general, detection of > 10
6-8 CFU per gram of this bacterium in stool samples of patients with gastroenteritis is considered clinically important (
42). Our results showed a similar detection limit (2 × 10
4 CFU/g) for both the culture and PCR methods. This amount was similar to those reported by Wise et al. (
42) using a multiplex PCR assay. In their study,
C. perfringens alpha and enterotoxin genes were targeted for detection of the bacterium in spiked fecal samples of domestic animals, and an average sensitivity of 10
2-4 CFU/g was reported. Our results illustrated a correlation between the PCR assay and traditional culture method for the detection of
C. perfringens in fecal spiked samples. Since the studied samples were subjected to heat treatment for the elimination of non-spore-forming bacteria (which may affect the germinating cells of
C. perfringens), it seems that the detection limits of these tests are lower than 10
3 CFU/g in human fecal samples.
The PCR results for all bacteria mentioned in this study were available on the same day as the assays were performed, whereas the culture results took 24 hours for Y. enterocolitica and 48 - 72 hours for C.jejuni, C. difficile, and C. perfringens. These results collectively showed that direct plating can be used successfully for the detection of anaerobic enteric bacterial pathogens (C. difficile and C. perfringens) and fastidious bacteria (Yersinia spp. and Campylobacter spp.) in human fecal samples when a bacterial load of greater than 104 CFU/gram is present. The specified PCR assays showed acceptable results with respect to detection limits, which makes these methods especially suitable for rapid diagnostics of slow-growing bacteria in the fecal samples of infected patients. Improvements in the DNA extraction method and target sequences of the primers are needed to achieve more accurate results.