Search Results
Abstract
Historically recalcitrant to treatment, infection of the nail unit is a pervasive clinical condition affecting about 10%-20% of the U.S. population; patients present with both cosmetic symptomatology and pain, with subsequent dystrophic morphology. To date, the presumptive infectious etiologies include classically-reported fungal dermatophytes, non-dermatophyte molds, and yeasts. Until now, the prevalence and potential contribution of bacteria to the clinical course of dystrophic nails had been relatively overlooked, if not dismissed. Previously, diagnosis had been largely made via clinical presentation, although microscopic examinations (KOH) of nail scrapings to identify fungal agents, and more recently, panel-specific PCR assays have been employed to elucidate causative infectious agents. Each of these tools suffers from test-specific limitations. However, molecular-age medicine now includes DNA-based tools to universally assess any microbe or pathogen with a known DNA sequence. This affords clinicians with rapid DNA sequencing technologies at their disposal. These sequencing-based diagnostic tools confer the accuracy of DNA level certainty, while concurrently obviating cultivation or microbial phenotypical biases. Using DNA sequencing-based diagnostics, the results herein document the first identification and quantification of significant bacterial, rather than mycotic, pathogens to the clinical manifestation of dystrophic nails. In direct opposition to the prevailing and presumptive mycotic-based etiologies, the results herein invoke questions about the very basis for our current standards of care, including effective treatment regimens.
Fungal Diversity and Onychomycosis
An Analysis of 8,816 Toenail Samples Using Quantitative PCR and Next-Generation Sequencing
Background:
Onychomycosis is a fungal infection of the nail that is often recalcitrant to treatment and prone to relapse. Traditional potassium hydroxide and culture diagnosis is costly and time-consuming. Therefore, molecular methods were investigated to demonstrate effectiveness in diagnosis and to quantify the microbial flora present that may be contributing to disease.
Methods:
A total of 8,816 clinically suspicious toenail samples were collected by podiatric physicians across the United States from patients aged 0 to 103 years and compared with a control population (N = 20). Next-generation sequencing and quantitative polymerase chain reaction were used to identify and quantify dermatophytes, nondermatophyte molds, and bacteria.
Results:
Approximately 50% of suspicious toenails contained both fungi and bacteria, with the dermatophyte Trichophyton rubrum contributing the highest relative abundance and presence in 40% of these samples. Of the remaining 50% of samples, 34% had bacterial species present and 16% had neither. Fungi only were present in less than 1% of samples. Nondermatophyte molds contributed to 11.0% of occurrences in fungus-positive samples. All of the control samples were negative for fungi, with commensal bacterial species composing most of the flora population.
Conclusions:
Molecular methods were successful in efficiently quantifying microbial and mycologic presence in the nail. Contributions from dermatophytes were lower than expected, whereas the opposite was true for nondermatophyte molds. The clinical significance of these results is currently unknown.
Onychomycosis Infections
Do Polymerase Chain Reaction and Culture Reports Agree?
Background:
Mycological culture is the traditional method for identifying infecting agents of onychomycosis despite high false-negative results, slower processing, and complications surrounding nondermatophyte mold (NDM) infections. Molecular polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods are faster and suited for ascertaining NDM infections.
Methods:
To measure agreement between culture and PCR methods for identification of infecting species of suspected onychomycosis, single toenail samples from 167 patients and repeated serial samples from 43 patients with suspected onychomycosis were processed by culture and PCR for identification of 16 dermatophytes and five NDMs. Agreement between methods was quantified using the kappa statistic (κ).
Results:
The methods exhibited fair agreement for the identification of all infecting organisms (single samples: κ = 0.32; repeated samples: κ = 0.38). For dermatophytes, agreement was moderate (single samples: κ = 0.44; repeated samples: κ = 0.42). For NDMs, agreement was poor with single samples (κ = 0.16) but fair with repeated samples (κ = 0.25). Excluding false-negative reports from analyses improved agreement between methods in all cases except the identification of NDMs from single samples.
Conclusions:
Culture was three or four times more likely to report a false-negative result compared with PCR. The increased agreement between methods observed by excluding false-negative reports statistically clarifies and highlights the major discord caused by false-negative cultures. The increased agreement of NDM identification from poor to fair with repeated sampling along with their poor agreement in the single samples, with and without false-negatives, affirms the complications of NDM identification and supports the recommendation that serial samples help confirm the diagnosis of NDM infections.
Background: Historically recalcitrant to treatment, infection of the nail unit is a pervasive clinical condition affecting approximately 10% to 20% of the US population; patients present with both cosmetic symptomatology and pain, with subsequent dystrophic morphology. To date, the presumptive infectious etiologies include classically reported fungal dermatophytes, nondermatophyte molds, and yeasts. Until now, the prevalence and potential contribution of bacteria to the clinical course of dystrophic nails had been relatively overlooked, if not dismissed. Previously, diagnosis had largely been made by means of clinical presentation, although microscopic examinations (potassium hydroxide) of nail scrapings to identify fungal agents and, more recently, panel-specific polymerase chain reaction assays have been used to elucidate causative infectious agents. Each of these tools suffers from test-specific limitations.
Methods: Molecular-age medicine now includes DNA-based tools to universally assess any microbe or pathogen with a known DNA sequence. This affords clinicians with rapid DNA sequencing technologies at their disposal. These sequencing-based diagnostic tools confer the accuracy of DNA-level certainty, and concurrently obviate cultivation or microbial phenotypical biases.
Results: Using DNA sequencing-based diagnostics, the results in this article document the first identification and quantification of significant bacterial, rather than mycotic, pathogens to the clinical manifestation of dystrophic nails.
Conclusions: In direct opposition to the prevailing and presumptive mycotic-based causes, the results in this article invoke questions about the very basis for our current standards of care, including effective treatment regimens.
Background
Diagnosis of onychomycosis using the periodic acid–Schiff (PAS) test for sensitive identification of hyphae and fungal culture for identification of species has become the mainstay for many clinical practices. With the advent of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing, physicians can identify a fungal toenail infection quickly with the added benefit of species identification. We compared PAS testing with multiplex PCR testing from a clinical perspective.
Methods
A total of 209 patients with clinically diagnosed onychomycosis were recruited. A high-resolution picture was taken of the affected hallux nail, and the nail was graded using the Onychomycosis Severity Index. A proximal sample of the affected toenail and subungual debris were obtained and split into two equal samples. One sample was sent for multiplex PCR testing and the other for PAS testing. The results were analyzed and compared.
Results
Six patients were excluded due to insufficient sample size for PCR testing. Of the remaining 203 patients, 109 (53.7%) tested positive with PAS, 77 (37.9%) tested positive with PCR. Forty-one patients tested positive with PAS but negative with PCR, and nine tested positive with PCR but negative with PAS.
Conclusions
Physicians should continue the practice of using PAS biopsy staining for confirmation of a fungal toenail infection before using oral antifungal therapy. Because multiplex PCR allows species identification, some physicians may elect to perform both tests.
Background
Podiatric physicians routinely use electric drills for the treatment of nail and skin conditions. The grinding process produces human nail and skin dust that is generally vacuumed into bags in the grinding unit. Many of the nails are thought to be mycotic, particularly because they are obtained from patients with symptoms of dermatophyte infections. Currently, there is limited information available on the detection of fungi from nail dust samples. Herein, we attempt to address this situation and outline some of the difficulties that pathology laboratories face in isolating and identifying dermatophytes from nail samples.
Methods
Fifty nail dust bags from podiatric medical clinics across all of the states and territories of Australia were collected and analyzed. Samples from the bags were inoculated onto primary isolation media. Fungal colonies that grew were then inoculated onto potato dextrose agar for identification using standard morphological (macroscopic and microscopic) features.
Results
One hundred fifty-one colonies of dermatophytes were identified from 43 of the 50 samples. In addition 471 nondermatophyte molds were isolated, along with some yeasts and bacteria.
Conclusions
The most common dermatophytes isolated were from the Trichophyton mentagrophytes/interdigitale complexes. Trichophyton rubrum, Trichophyton tonsurans, Trichophyton soudanense, and Epidermophyton floccosum were also isolated. An unidentified group of dermatophytes was also present. The three most common genera of nondermatophyte molds were Aspergillus, Penicillium, and Scopulariopsis, all of which have been implicated in onychomycosis and more general disease. The presence of viable fungal pathogens in the dust could potentially pose a health problem to podiatric physicians.
Background
Reports of mixed infections with nondermatophyte molds (NDMs) and dermatophytes in onychomycosis are rare, possibly owing to the inhibition of NDM growth during traditional culture. We sought to determine the prevalence of mixed infections in onychomycosis using molecular identification.
Methods
Molecular analyses were used to identify infecting organisms directly from at least two serial great toenail samples from each of the 44 patients.
Results
Mixed infections were present in 41% of the patients (18 of 44). A single coinfecting NDM was the most common mixed infection and was detected in 34% of patients with onychomycosis (15 of 44), with Fusarium oxysporum present in 14% (6 of 44), Scopulariopsis brevicaulis in 9% (4 of 44), Acremonium spp in 2% (1 of 44), Aspergillus spp in 4.5% (2 of 44), and Scytalidium spp in 4.5% (2 of 44). Mixed infections with two NDMs were found in 7% of patients (3 of 44).
Conclusions
Mixed onychomycosis infections may be more prevalent than previously reported.
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.
Background
Onychomycosis is estimated to occur in approximately 10% of the global population, with most cases caused by Trichophyton rubrum. Some persistent onychomycosis is caused by mixed infections of T rubrum and one or more co-infecting nondermatophyte molds (NDMs). In onychomycosis, T rubrum strain types may naturally switch and may also be triggered to switch in response to antifungal therapy. T rubrum strain types in mixed infections of onychomycosis have not been characterized.
Methods
T rubrum DNA strains in mixed infections of onychomycosis containing co-infecting NDMs were compared with a baseline North American population through polymerase chain reaction amplification of ribosomal DNA tandemly repetitive subelements (TRSs) 1 and 2. The baseline DNA strain types were determined from 102 clinical isolates of T rubrum. The T rubrum DNA strain types from mixed infections were determined from 63 repeated toenail samples from 15 patients.
Results
Two unique TRS-2 types among the clinical isolates contributed to four unique TRS-1 and TRS-2 strain types. Six TRS-1 and TRS-2 strain types represented 92% of the clinical isolates of T rubrum. Four TRS-1 and TRS-2 strain types accounted for 100% of the T rubrum within mixed infections.
Conclusions
Four unique North American T rubrum strains were identified. In support of a shared ancestry, the T rubrum DNA strain types found in mixed infections with NDMs were among the most abundant types. A population of T rubrum strains in mixed infections of onychomycosis has been characterized, with more than one strain detected in some nails. The presence of a co-infecting NDM in mixed infections may contribute to failed therapy by stabilizing the T rubrum strain type, possibly preventing the antifungal therapy–induced strain type switching observed with infections caused by T rubrum alone.
Diagnosis and Prevalence of Onychomycosis in Diabetic Neuropathic Patients
An Observational Study
Background: An observational study was conducted to assess the prevalence of onychomycosis in clinically suspected diabetic neuropathic patients and to assess the reliability of the diagnosis.
Methods: One hundred successive type 1 and 2 diabetic patients with diabetic neuropathy were followed. Diabetic neuropathy was defined by a vibration perception threshold greater than 25 V and onychomycosis by clinical diagnosis. Samples of the most affected nail were taken. Potassium hydroxide testing and culture were performed. Photographs of the nails were used by two dermatologists for diagnosis.
Results: The mean ± SE age was 62.3 ± 11.4 years for the 20 onychomycotic patients and 60.3 ± 10.4 years for the entire cohort; 14 onychomycotic patients (70%) were male versus 56 in the full cohort (56%) (P < .05). The prevalence of onychomycosis was 20% (culture and potassium hydroxide test positive) and 24% (culture positive). Twenty or 30 patients were positive by the potassium hydroxide test, depending on the investigator. The most frequent pathogen found was Trichophyton rubrum (11 of 20 patients; 55%). The positive predictive values of the dermatologist’s diagnoses were 57.8% and 35.6%, and the negative predictive values were 85.0% and 90.5%. The two expert’s results were significantly different (P < .05).
Conclusions: The diagnosis of onychomycosis is difficult to make. The diagnostic methods commonly used are not satisfactory. If onychomycosis is dangerous for the diabetic foot, a better diagnostic method is needed. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 99(2): 135–139, 2009)
