Fluorescent in situ hybridization can be used as a complementary assay for the diagnosis of Tropheryma whipplei infection
- 95 Downloads
Immunohistochemistry and Periodic acid–Schiff (PAS) staining have been routinely used for the diagnosis of Whipple’s disease (WD). However, these methods present limitations. As a result, the last years, Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) has been increasingly used as a complementary tool for the diagnosis of WD from various tissue samples.
In this study, we visualized, by FISH, Tropheryma whipplei within macrophages of a lymph node from a patient with WD. Moreover, we report in this study a patient with a pulmonary biopsy compatible with WD by PAS, immunostaining and FISH, although the specific molecular assays for T. whipplei were negative. Sequencing analysis of the 16S rDNA revealed a T. whipplei-related species with unknown classification.
FISH can be a valuable method for the detection of Tropheryma species in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues. FISH cannot replace the other already approved diagnostic techniques for WD, it can be used as a complementary tool and can provide supplementary information in a relatively short time.
KeywordsTropheryma whipplei Fluorescent in situ hybridization Lymphadenopathy Respiratory infection Whipple’s disease
This study was supported by Méditerranée-Infection and the National Research Agency under the program “Investissements d’Avenir” reference ANR-10-IAHU-03. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Mediterranée-Infection foundation under the number 2016-025.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Mediterranée Infection foundation under the number 2016-025.
- 7.Morel A-S, Dubourg G, Prudent E, Edouard S, Gouriet F, Casalta J-P, et al. Complementarity between targeted real-time specific PCR and conventional broad-range 16S rDNA PCR in the syndrome-driven diagnosis of infectious diseases. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015;34:561–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar