Comparison of three qPCR-based commercial tests for detection of periodontal pathogens
Abstract In periodontal practice microbial results of periodontal test kits for identification of key pathogens are an aid in the treatment planning. Information on the performance of commercially available test kits is therefore essential for the clinician. In this retrospective analysis three comm...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Nature Publishing Group
2021-03-01
|
Series: | Scientific Reports |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85305-3 |
id |
doaj-d6ddd2dd56ec4264a7a883ebe7bd54d7 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-d6ddd2dd56ec4264a7a883ebe7bd54d72021-03-21T12:33:51ZengNature Publishing GroupScientific Reports2045-23222021-03-011111810.1038/s41598-021-85305-3Comparison of three qPCR-based commercial tests for detection of periodontal pathogensFridus Van der Weijden0Mirella Rijnen1Cees Valkenburg2Clinic for PeriodontologyClinic for PeriodontologyDepartment of Periodontology, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), A Joint Venture Between the Faculty of Dentistry, University of Amsterdam and Faculty of Dentistry, Vrije Universiteit AmsterdamAbstract In periodontal practice microbial results of periodontal test kits for identification of key pathogens are an aid in the treatment planning. Information on the performance of commercially available test kits is therefore essential for the clinician. In this retrospective analysis three commercially available qPCR kits for detection and quantification of selected periodontal bacterial species were compared, using 100 clinical samples from patients with untreated periodontitis. The analysis involved two separate comparisons in which kit A (LabOral Diagnostics, The Netherlands) was compared with kit B (Advanced Dental Diagnostics, The Netherlands), and with kit C (OralDent diagnostics, The Netherlands). Analytic procedures for detection and quantification of selected periodontal bacterial species were carried out according to the instructions of the laboratories. Kit A detected target species more often, and absolute numbers of bacterial cells were higher than with kit B. A high degree of similarity was found between the test outcomes by kit A and kit C. All three kits performed satisfactory but small and significant differences exist between kits.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85305-3 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Fridus Van der Weijden Mirella Rijnen Cees Valkenburg |
spellingShingle |
Fridus Van der Weijden Mirella Rijnen Cees Valkenburg Comparison of three qPCR-based commercial tests for detection of periodontal pathogens Scientific Reports |
author_facet |
Fridus Van der Weijden Mirella Rijnen Cees Valkenburg |
author_sort |
Fridus Van der Weijden |
title |
Comparison of three qPCR-based commercial tests for detection of periodontal pathogens |
title_short |
Comparison of three qPCR-based commercial tests for detection of periodontal pathogens |
title_full |
Comparison of three qPCR-based commercial tests for detection of periodontal pathogens |
title_fullStr |
Comparison of three qPCR-based commercial tests for detection of periodontal pathogens |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparison of three qPCR-based commercial tests for detection of periodontal pathogens |
title_sort |
comparison of three qpcr-based commercial tests for detection of periodontal pathogens |
publisher |
Nature Publishing Group |
series |
Scientific Reports |
issn |
2045-2322 |
publishDate |
2021-03-01 |
description |
Abstract In periodontal practice microbial results of periodontal test kits for identification of key pathogens are an aid in the treatment planning. Information on the performance of commercially available test kits is therefore essential for the clinician. In this retrospective analysis three commercially available qPCR kits for detection and quantification of selected periodontal bacterial species were compared, using 100 clinical samples from patients with untreated periodontitis. The analysis involved two separate comparisons in which kit A (LabOral Diagnostics, The Netherlands) was compared with kit B (Advanced Dental Diagnostics, The Netherlands), and with kit C (OralDent diagnostics, The Netherlands). Analytic procedures for detection and quantification of selected periodontal bacterial species were carried out according to the instructions of the laboratories. Kit A detected target species more often, and absolute numbers of bacterial cells were higher than with kit B. A high degree of similarity was found between the test outcomes by kit A and kit C. All three kits performed satisfactory but small and significant differences exist between kits. |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85305-3 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT fridusvanderweijden comparisonofthreeqpcrbasedcommercialtestsfordetectionofperiodontalpathogens AT mirellarijnen comparisonofthreeqpcrbasedcommercialtestsfordetectionofperiodontalpathogens AT ceesvalkenburg comparisonofthreeqpcrbasedcommercialtestsfordetectionofperiodontalpathogens |
_version_ |
1724210455788912640 |