A comparison of four DNA extraction protocols for the analysis of urine from patients with visceral leishmaniasis

Introduction Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) may offer an alternative diagnostic option when clinical signs and symptoms suggest visceral leishmaniasis (VL) but microscopic scanning and serological tests provide negative results. PCR using urine is sensitive enough to diagnose human visceral leishmaniasis (VL). However, DNA quality is a crucial factor for successful amplification. Methods A comparative performance evaluation of DNA extraction methods from the urine of patients with VL using two commercially available extraction kits and two phenol-chloroform protocols was conducted to determine which method produces the highest quality DNA suitable for PCR amplification, as well as the most sensitive, fast and inexpensive method. All commercially available kits were able to shorten the duration of DNA extraction. Results With regard to detection limits, both phenol: chloroform extraction and the QIAamp DNA Mini Kit provided good results (0.1 pg of DNA) for the extraction of DNA from a parasite smaller than Leishmania (Leishmania) infantum (< 100fg of DNA). However, among 11 urine samples from subjects with VL, better performance was achieved with the phenol:chloroform method (8/11) relative to the QIAamp DNA Mini Kit (4/11), with a greater number of positive samples detected at a lower cost using PCR. Conclusion Our results demonstrate that phenol:chloroform with an ethanol precipitation prior to extraction is the most efficient method in terms of yield and cost, using urine as a non-invasive source of DNA and providing an alternative diagnostic method at a low cost.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Silva,Maria Almerice Lopes da, Medeiros,Zulma, Soares,Cynthia Regina Pedrosa, Silva,Elis Dionísio da, Miranda-Filho,Demócrito Barros, Melo,Fábio Lopes de
Format: Digital revista
Language:English
Published: Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical - SBMT 2014
Online Access:http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0037-86822014000200193
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id oai:scielo:S0037-86822014000200193
record_format ojs
spelling oai:scielo:S0037-868220140002001932014-05-15A comparison of four DNA extraction protocols for the analysis of urine from patients with visceral leishmaniasisSilva,Maria Almerice Lopes daMedeiros,ZulmaSoares,Cynthia Regina PedrosaSilva,Elis Dionísio daMiranda-Filho,Demócrito BarrosMelo,Fábio Lopes de Urine Extraction DNA Visceral leishmaniasis Introduction Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) may offer an alternative diagnostic option when clinical signs and symptoms suggest visceral leishmaniasis (VL) but microscopic scanning and serological tests provide negative results. PCR using urine is sensitive enough to diagnose human visceral leishmaniasis (VL). However, DNA quality is a crucial factor for successful amplification. Methods A comparative performance evaluation of DNA extraction methods from the urine of patients with VL using two commercially available extraction kits and two phenol-chloroform protocols was conducted to determine which method produces the highest quality DNA suitable for PCR amplification, as well as the most sensitive, fast and inexpensive method. All commercially available kits were able to shorten the duration of DNA extraction. Results With regard to detection limits, both phenol: chloroform extraction and the QIAamp DNA Mini Kit provided good results (0.1 pg of DNA) for the extraction of DNA from a parasite smaller than Leishmania (Leishmania) infantum (< 100fg of DNA). However, among 11 urine samples from subjects with VL, better performance was achieved with the phenol:chloroform method (8/11) relative to the QIAamp DNA Mini Kit (4/11), with a greater number of positive samples detected at a lower cost using PCR. Conclusion Our results demonstrate that phenol:chloroform with an ethanol precipitation prior to extraction is the most efficient method in terms of yield and cost, using urine as a non-invasive source of DNA and providing an alternative diagnostic method at a low cost. info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical - SBMTRevista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical v.47 n.2 20142014-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0037-86822014000200193en10.1590/0037-8682-0233-2013
institution SCIELO
collection OJS
country Brasil
countrycode BR
component Revista
access En linea
databasecode rev-scielo-br
tag revista
region America del Sur
libraryname SciELO
language English
format Digital
author Silva,Maria Almerice Lopes da
Medeiros,Zulma
Soares,Cynthia Regina Pedrosa
Silva,Elis Dionísio da
Miranda-Filho,Demócrito Barros
Melo,Fábio Lopes de
spellingShingle Silva,Maria Almerice Lopes da
Medeiros,Zulma
Soares,Cynthia Regina Pedrosa
Silva,Elis Dionísio da
Miranda-Filho,Demócrito Barros
Melo,Fábio Lopes de
A comparison of four DNA extraction protocols for the analysis of urine from patients with visceral leishmaniasis
author_facet Silva,Maria Almerice Lopes da
Medeiros,Zulma
Soares,Cynthia Regina Pedrosa
Silva,Elis Dionísio da
Miranda-Filho,Demócrito Barros
Melo,Fábio Lopes de
author_sort Silva,Maria Almerice Lopes da
title A comparison of four DNA extraction protocols for the analysis of urine from patients with visceral leishmaniasis
title_short A comparison of four DNA extraction protocols for the analysis of urine from patients with visceral leishmaniasis
title_full A comparison of four DNA extraction protocols for the analysis of urine from patients with visceral leishmaniasis
title_fullStr A comparison of four DNA extraction protocols for the analysis of urine from patients with visceral leishmaniasis
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of four DNA extraction protocols for the analysis of urine from patients with visceral leishmaniasis
title_sort comparison of four dna extraction protocols for the analysis of urine from patients with visceral leishmaniasis
description Introduction Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) may offer an alternative diagnostic option when clinical signs and symptoms suggest visceral leishmaniasis (VL) but microscopic scanning and serological tests provide negative results. PCR using urine is sensitive enough to diagnose human visceral leishmaniasis (VL). However, DNA quality is a crucial factor for successful amplification. Methods A comparative performance evaluation of DNA extraction methods from the urine of patients with VL using two commercially available extraction kits and two phenol-chloroform protocols was conducted to determine which method produces the highest quality DNA suitable for PCR amplification, as well as the most sensitive, fast and inexpensive method. All commercially available kits were able to shorten the duration of DNA extraction. Results With regard to detection limits, both phenol: chloroform extraction and the QIAamp DNA Mini Kit provided good results (0.1 pg of DNA) for the extraction of DNA from a parasite smaller than Leishmania (Leishmania) infantum (< 100fg of DNA). However, among 11 urine samples from subjects with VL, better performance was achieved with the phenol:chloroform method (8/11) relative to the QIAamp DNA Mini Kit (4/11), with a greater number of positive samples detected at a lower cost using PCR. Conclusion Our results demonstrate that phenol:chloroform with an ethanol precipitation prior to extraction is the most efficient method in terms of yield and cost, using urine as a non-invasive source of DNA and providing an alternative diagnostic method at a low cost.
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical - SBMT
publishDate 2014
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0037-86822014000200193
work_keys_str_mv AT silvamariaalmericelopesda acomparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
AT medeiroszulma acomparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
AT soarescynthiareginapedrosa acomparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
AT silvaelisdionisioda acomparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
AT mirandafilhodemocritobarros acomparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
AT melofabiolopesde acomparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
AT silvamariaalmericelopesda comparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
AT medeiroszulma comparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
AT soarescynthiareginapedrosa comparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
AT silvaelisdionisioda comparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
AT mirandafilhodemocritobarros comparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
AT melofabiolopesde comparisonoffourdnaextractionprotocolsfortheanalysisofurinefrompatientswithvisceralleishmaniasis
_version_ 1756380526358298624