Comparison of rRNA-based reverse transcription PCR and rDNA-based PCR for the detection of streptococci in root canal infections.

Laís Cunha Prado, Giulio Gavini, Amanda da Costa Silveira, Vitor Cesar Nakamura, Marcia Pinto Alves Mayer, Ericka Tavares Pinheiro
{"title":"Comparison of rRNA-based reverse transcription PCR and rDNA-based PCR for the detection of streptococci in root canal infections.","authors":"Laís Cunha Prado,&nbsp;Giulio Gavini,&nbsp;Amanda da Costa Silveira,&nbsp;Vitor Cesar Nakamura,&nbsp;Marcia Pinto Alves Mayer,&nbsp;Ericka Tavares Pinheiro","doi":"10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The rDNA-based method is unable to distinguish between alive and dead cells. Alternatively, bacterial viability can be assessed by molecular methods based on ribosomal RNA (rRNA). Therefore, this study aimed to detect viable streptococci in root canal samples using rRNA-based reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), compared to an rDNA-based PCR assay.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>Microbiological root canal samples were obtained from 32 teeth with primary endodontic infections before (S1) and after chemomechanical preparation (S2), and after removal of intracanal medication (S3). RNA and DNA were extracted, and complementary DNA (cDNA) was synthesized from RNA using RT reaction. cDNA and genomic DNA were subjected to PCR with primers complementary to the 16S rRNA sequences of Streptococcus spp. McNemar's test was used to compare the detection rate of both assays (P<0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Streptococci were detected in 28.12% (9/32) and 37.5% (12/32) of S1 samples using rRNA- and rDNA-based PCR assays, respectively. In contrast, they were detected in only 6.25% (2/32) of S2 samples using rRNA-based RT-PCR, compared to 15.62% (5/32) using rDNA-based PCR. Finally, in S3 samples, streptococci were not detected by rRNA, whereas rDNA-based PCR still detected the bacteria in 12.5% (4/32) of the samples. The total number of PCR-positive reactions in the rDNA-based PCR was higher than in the rRNA-based assay (P<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The rRNA-based RT-PCR showed a lower detection rate of streptococci when compared to the rDNA-based PCR, suggesting that the latter may have detected dead cells of streptococci in root canal samples.</p>","PeriodicalId":321675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB","volume":" ","pages":"e20180256"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0256","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0256","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Objective: The rDNA-based method is unable to distinguish between alive and dead cells. Alternatively, bacterial viability can be assessed by molecular methods based on ribosomal RNA (rRNA). Therefore, this study aimed to detect viable streptococci in root canal samples using rRNA-based reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), compared to an rDNA-based PCR assay.

Methodology: Microbiological root canal samples were obtained from 32 teeth with primary endodontic infections before (S1) and after chemomechanical preparation (S2), and after removal of intracanal medication (S3). RNA and DNA were extracted, and complementary DNA (cDNA) was synthesized from RNA using RT reaction. cDNA and genomic DNA were subjected to PCR with primers complementary to the 16S rRNA sequences of Streptococcus spp. McNemar's test was used to compare the detection rate of both assays (P<0.05).

Results: Streptococci were detected in 28.12% (9/32) and 37.5% (12/32) of S1 samples using rRNA- and rDNA-based PCR assays, respectively. In contrast, they were detected in only 6.25% (2/32) of S2 samples using rRNA-based RT-PCR, compared to 15.62% (5/32) using rDNA-based PCR. Finally, in S3 samples, streptococci were not detected by rRNA, whereas rDNA-based PCR still detected the bacteria in 12.5% (4/32) of the samples. The total number of PCR-positive reactions in the rDNA-based PCR was higher than in the rRNA-based assay (P<0.05).

Conclusions: The rRNA-based RT-PCR showed a lower detection rate of streptococci when compared to the rDNA-based PCR, suggesting that the latter may have detected dead cells of streptococci in root canal samples.

基于rrna的反转录PCR与基于rdna的PCR检测根管感染链球菌的比较
目的:基于rdna的方法无法区分活细胞和死细胞。另外,细菌活力可以通过基于核糖体RNA (rRNA)的分子方法进行评估。因此,本研究旨在利用基于rrna的逆转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)检测根管样品中活菌链球菌,并与基于rdna的PCR检测方法进行比较。方法:对32颗原发性根管感染的牙齿,在化学力学预备(S1)前、化学力学预备(S2)后和去除管内药物(S3)后,采集微生物根管样本。提取RNA和DNA,用RT反应从RNA合成互补DNA (cDNA)。用cDNA和基因组DNA与链球菌16S rRNA序列互补的引物进行PCR,采用McNemar试验比较两种方法的检出率(结果:基于rRNA和基于rdna的PCR分别在S1样品中检出28.12%(9/32)和37.5%(12/32)的链球菌。相比之下,基于rdna的RT-PCR在S2样本中仅检测到6.25%(2/32),而基于rdna的PCR检测到15.62%(5/32)。最后,在S3样品中,rRNA未检测到链球菌,而基于rdna的PCR仍检测到12.5%(4/32)的样品。基于rdna的RT-PCR的PCR阳性反应总数高于基于rdna的PCR (p结论:基于rdna的RT-PCR对链球菌的检出率低于基于rdna的PCR,表明后者可能在根管样品中检测到链球菌的死亡细胞。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信