Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Aug 7;14(8):e0220307.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220307. eCollection 2019.

Evaluation of flow cytometry for the detection of bacteria in biological fluids

Elisa Rubio  1 , Yuliya Zboromyrska  2 , Jordi Bosch  1   3 , Mariana J Fernandez-Pittol  1 , Berta I Fidalgo  1 , Assumpta Fasanella  1 , Anna Mons  1 , Angely Román  1 , Climent Casals-Pascual  1   3 , Jordi Vila  1   3
Affiliations

Evaluation of flow cytometry for the detection of bacteria in biological fluids

Elisa Rubio et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Objectives: Conventional microbiological procedures for the isolation of bacteria from biological fluids consist of culture on solid media and enrichment broth. However, these methods can delay the microbiological identification for up to 4 days. The aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical performance of Sysmex UF500i (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) as a screening method for the detection of bacteria in different biological fluids in comparison with direct Gram staining and the conventional culture on solid media and enrichment broth.

Methods: A total of 479 biological fluid samples were included in the study (180 ascitic, 131 amniotic, 56 synovial, 40 cerebrospinal, 36 pleural, 24 peritoneal, 9 bile and 3 pericardial fluids). All samples were processed by conventional culture methods and analyzed by flow cytometry. Direct Gram staining was performed in 339 samples. The amount of growth on culture was recorded for positive samples.

Results: Bacterial and white blood cell count by flow cytometry was significantly higher among culture positive samples and samples with a positive direct Gram stain compared to culture negative samples. Bacterial count directly correlated with the amount of growth on culture (Kruskall-Wallis H χ2(3) = 11.577, p = 0.009). The best specificity (95%) for bacterial count to predict culture positivity was achieved applying a cut-off value of 240 bacteria/μL.

Conclusions: Bacterial and white blood cell counts obtained with flow cytometry correlate with culture results in biological fluids. Bacterial count can be used as a complementary method along with the direct Gram stain to promptly detect positive samples and perform other diagnostic techniques in order to accelerate the bacterial detection and identification.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Sysmex España S.L. financially supported the study providing reagents and equipment. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Gram staining, culture, level of growth on cultured plates and flow cytometry results of the biological samples included in the study.
* Thi: growth only in the thioglycollate broth subcultures, <10 grown colonies on cultured plates, 10–100 grown colonies on cultured plates, >100 grown colonies on cultured plates.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Distribution of bacterial count by flow cytometry according to the level of growth on cultured plates.
IQR: interquartile range Thioglycollate: growth only in the thioglycollate broth subcultures, <10 grown colonies on cultured plates, 10–100 grown colonies on cultured plates, >100 grown colonies on cultured plates.
Fig 3
Fig 3. ROC curve for bacterial count (BACT) and leukocyte count (WBC) by flow cytometry versus culture positivity for 479 biological fluid samples with 83 samples positive by culture.
AUC: Area under the curve.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Johnson CT, Adami RR, Farzin A. Antibiotic therapy for chorioamnionitis to reduce the global burden of associated disease. Front Pharmacol. 2017;8: 1–6. 10.3389/fphar.2017.00001 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Proulx N, Fréchette D, Toye B, Chan J, Kravcik S. Delays in the administration of antibiotics are associated with mortality from adult acute bacterial meningitis. QJM—Mon J Assoc Physicians. 2005;98: 291–298. 10.1093/qjmed/hci047 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dever JB, Sheikh MY. Review article: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis-bacteriology, diagnosis, treatment, risk factors and prevention. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2015;41: 1116–1131. 10.1111/apt.13172 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Stirling P, Faroug R, Amanat S, Ahmed A, Armstrong M, Sharma P, et al. False-negative rate of gram-stain microscopy for diagnosis of septic arthritis: Suggestions for improvement. Int J Microbiol. 2014;2014: 830857 10.1155/2014/830857 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Romero R, Yoon BH, Mazor M, Gomez R, Gonzalez R, Diamond MP, et al. A comparative study of the diagnostic performance of amniotic fluid glucose, white blood cell count, interleukin-6, and Gram stain in the detection of microbial invasion in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. Elsevier; 1993;169: 839–851. 10.1016/0002-9378(93)90014-a - DOI - PubMed

Publication types