Fluorescence in situ hybridization, a complementary molecular tool for the clinical diagnosis of infectious diseases by intracellular and fastidious bacteria
Authors: Elsa Prudent
Didier Raoult
Journal: FEMS Microbiology Reviews (2019)
Discipline: MICROBIOLOGY
Keywords: intracellular bacteria; molecular diagnosis; nucleic acids; infectiology; fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)
Affiliations: Aix Marseille Université, IRD, APHM, MEPHI, IHU-Méditerranée Infection, 19–21 Boulevard Jean Moulin, 13005 Marseille, France

Abstract:  Many obligate or facultative intracellular bacteria pose a critical problem in clinical microbiology diagnosis as a result of their fastidious growth or lack of growth in conventional culture media. Molecular diagnosis is based on the analysis and demonstration of nucleic acids (DNA and RNA). In the field of infectiology, it combines laboratory medicine with the technology of molecular genetics to identify infectious pathogens. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is used for the detection and localization of nucleotide sequences in various samples while preserving cell integrity. For more than 30 years, FISH methods have in constant evolution with the development of rRNA-targeted probes and synthetic molecules, such as PNA, which have contributed to the development of this technique in various fields by research and diagnostic laboratories. We describe here a panel of infectious diseases due to intracellular bacteria for which FISH diagnosis has proven its effectiveness. FISH techniques were applied in cases of blood-culture-negative endocarditis, respiratory infections, gastrointestinal diseases, mycobacterial infections, highly pathogenic microorganisms and other fastidious bacteria such as spirochetes. FISH has been proven to be applicable to various samples and for diverse infectious diseases, it can be used as a complementary tool for the diagnosis of infectious diseases by intracellular and fastidious bacteria. 

Retracted: No

PubPeer comments:
 In this paper, the authors mentioned an approval under the IHU ethics committee no. 2016-025. We can note that several other papers mentioned the same ethics approval number. Usually, one ethical approval number is attached to one protocol. In the other paper, we can note : different type of bacteria, patients in another country for a different indication (tuberculosis), ... It should be in the public interest to understand how a same ethical approval number for a protocol can cover so many different type of situations. - [Extended spectrum of antibiotic susceptibility for tuberculosis, Djibouti] - [u201cMycobacterium mephinesiau201d, a Mycobacterium terrae complex species of clinical interest isolated in French Polynesia] - [Pulmonary Isolation of Multidrug resistant u201cMycobacterium simulansu201d and Mycobacterium tuberculosis from a patient in the Horn of Africa] - [FISH and PNA FISH for the diagnosis of Q fever endocarditis and vascular infections.] - [Fluorescence in situ hybridization, a complementary molecular tool for the clinical diagnosis of infectious diseases by intracellular and fastidious bacteria] - [Fluorescent in situ hybridization can be used as a complementary assay for the diagnosis of Tropheryma whipplei infection] ,