advertising
-
1.
Weitzman L, Summerbell RC: The dermatophytes. Clin Microbiol Rev 8: 240, 1995.
-
2.
Monzón de la Torre A, Cuenca-Estrella M, Rodríguez-Tudela JL: Epidemiological survey of dermatophytosis in Spain (April-June 2001). Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 21: 477, 2003.
-
3.
Faergemann J, Baran R: Epidemiology, clinical presentation and diagnosis of onychomycosis. Br J Dermatol 149 (suppl 65): 1, 2003.
-
4.
Martinez Roig A: “Micosis cutáneas,” in Protocolos diagnósticos y terapéuticos en Dermatología Pediátrica, edited by FA Moraga Llop, p 65, Asociación Española de Pediatría, Madrid, 2003.
-
5.
Stivens DA: Diagnosis of fungal infections: current status. J Antimicrob Chemother 49 (suppl 1): 11, 2002.
-
6.
Petrini B, von Rosen ML: Optimal dermatophyte diagnosis requires both microscopy and culture. Lakartidningen 99: 4084. 2002.
-
7.
Mahoney JM, Bennet J, Olsen B: The diagnosis of onychomycosis. Dermatol Clin 21: 463, 2003.
-
8.
Gadea I, Cuenca-Estrella M, Martín E, et al: Procedimientos de diagnóstico microbiológico de las micosis y estudios de sensibilidad a los antifúngicos. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 25: 336, 2007.
-
9.
Elewski BE: Onycomycosis: pathogenesis, diagnosis and management. Clin Microbiol Rev 11: 415, 1998.
-
10.
Loo DS: Cutaneous fungal infection in the elderly. Dermatol Clin 22: 33, 2004.
-
11.
Brillowska-Dabrowska A, Saunte DM, Arendrup MC: Five-hour diagnosis of dermatophyte nail infections with specific detection of Tricophyton rubrum. J Clin Microbiol 45: 1200, 2007.
-
12.
Balajee SA, Sigler L, Brandt ME: DNA and the classical way: identification of medically important molds in the 21st century. Med Mycol 45: 475, 2007.
-
13.
Liu D, Coloe S, Baird R, et al: Application of PCR to the identification of dermatophyte fungi. J Med Microbiol 49: 493, 2000.
-
14.
Shehata AS, Mukhetjee PK, Aboulatta HN, et al: Single-step PCR using (GACA)4 primer: utililty for rapid identification of dermatophyte species and strains. J Clin Microbiol 46: 2641, 2008.
-
15.
Rodríguez-Tudela JL, Cuesta I, Gómez-López A, et al: Molecular techniques in mycology. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 26 (suppl 13): 47, 2008.
-
16.
Yang J, Chen L, Wang L, et al: TrED: the Trichophyton rubrum Expression Database. BMC Genomics 8: 250, 2007.
-
17.
Denning DW, Evans EGV, Kibbler CC, et al: Fungal nail disease: a guide to good practice (report of a Working Group of the British Society for Medical Mycology). BMJ 311: 1277, 1995.
-
18.
Hay RJ, Jones RM: New molecular tools in the diagnosis of superficial fungal infections. Clin Dermatol 28: 190, 2010.
-
19.
Gupta AK, Zaman M, Singh J: Fast and sensitive detection of Trichophyton rubrum DNA from the nail samples of patients with onychomycosis by a double-round polymerase chain reaction-based assay. Br J Dermatol 157: 698, 2007.
-
20.
Gräser Y, Scott J, Summerbell R: The new species concept in dermatophytes: a polyphasic approach. Mycopathologia 166: 239, 2008.
Using a Polymerase Chain Reaction as a Complementary Test to Improve the Detection of Dermatophyte Fungus in Nails
Search for other papers by María José Iglesias Sánchez in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ana María Pérez Pico in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Félix Marcos Tejedor in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by María Jesús Iglesias Sánchez in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Raquel Mayordomo Acevedo in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background
Dermatomycoses are a group of pathologic abnormalities frequently seen in clinical practice, and their prevalence has increased in recent decades. Diagnostic confirmation of mycotic infection in nails is essential because there are several pathologic conditions with similar clinical manifestations. The classical method for confirming the presence of fungus in nail is microbiological culture and the identification of morphological structures by microscopy.
Methods
We devised a nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) that amplifies specific DNA sequences of dermatophyte fungus that is notably faster than the 3 to 4 weeks that the traditional procedure takes. We compared this new technique and the conventional plate culture method in 225 nail samples. The results were subjected to statistical analysis.
Results
We found concordance in 78.2% of the samples analyzed by the two methods and increased sensitivity when simultaneously using the two methods to analyze clinical samples. Now we can confirm the presence of dermatophyte fungus in most of the positive samples in just 24 hours, and we have to wait for the result of culture only in negative PCR cases.
Conclusions
Although this PCR cannot, at present, substitute for the traditional culture method in the detection of dermatophyte infection of the nails, it can be used as a complementary technique because its main advantage lies in the significant reduction of time used for diagnosis, in addition to higher sensitivity.
advertising
