ArticleScientific reports2024
Multicenter comparative study of Enterocytozoon bieneusi DNA extraction methods from stool samples, and mechanical pretreatment protocols evaluation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Microsporidiosis: An emerging opportunistic parasitic infection.Tropical parasitologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nowadays, the use of qPCR for the diagnosis of intestinal microsporidiosis is increasing. There are several studies on the evaluation of qPCR performance but very few focus on the stool pretreatment step before DNA extraction, which is nevertheless a crucial step. This study focuses on the mechanical pretreatment of stools for Enterocytozoon bieneusi spores DNA extraction. Firstly, a multicenter comparative study was conducted evaluating seven extraction methods (manual or automated) including various mechanical pretreatment. Secondly, several durations and grinding speeds and types of beads were tested in order to optimize mechanical pretreatment. Extraction methods of the various centers had widely-varying performances especially for samples with low microsporidia loads. Nuclisens® easyMAG (BioMérieux) and Quick DNA Fecal/Soil Microbe Microprep kit (ZymoResearch) presented the best performances (highest frequencies of detection of low spore concentrations and lowest Ct values). Optimal performances of mechanical pretreatment were obtained by applying a speed of 30 Hz during 60 s with the TissueLyser II (Qiagen) using commercial beads of various materials and sizes (from ZymoResearch or MP Biomedicals). Overall, the optimal DNA extraction method for E. bieneusi spores contained in stool samples was obtained with a strong but short bead beating using small-sized beads from various materials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.