PCR Testing: A Revolution in UTI Diagnosis and Treatment

Approximately 50% of adult females in the U.S. have encountered at least one urinary tract infection (UTI), costing around $1.6 billion every year.1 Within this group, 25-50% have recurrent UTIs, denoted by two infections in half a year or three within a year.2,3 The conventional UTI diagnosis method, urinalysis and urine culture, has a 20-30% false negative rate.4,5 This technique, which usually spans three to five days, often overlooks anaerobic, meticulous, and fungal organisms. A healthy urinary microbiome can both complicate UTI diagnosis and enhance comprehension of its polymicrobial nature, pathogenic microbiomes, and development of resistant biofilms.6,7 This has led to the advent of techniques like polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing.

PCR testing amplifies and subsequently detects specific DNA sequences of microorganisms, even in low quantities. The advanced Multiplex PCR can recognize multiple DNA sequences simultaneously, enhancing its precision, sensitivity, and speed. This method has found utility in many clinical scenarios, including UTIs. In less than a day, PCR can identify pathogens and provide antibiotic resistance data to guide therapy. Comparative research shows a 96% positivity rate with PCR, compared to an 81% positivity rate with culture in symptomatic women.4,8

86% of users expressed satisfaction with PCR tests, often choosing them again.9 However, a mere 60% agreement was found between PCR results and phenotypic AST via culture.10 DNA-based testing limitations might account for this gap, as it might not detect mutations tied to gene activity or resistance from microorganism interactions.

For women with persistent symptoms after receiving a culture-based false-negative or those with drug-resistant and complex UTIs, PCR testing might be crucial. Although PCR can detect an added 22% of urine pathogens and multi-microbial UTIs versus culture, it hasn’t been proven to enhance patient outcomes on its own.8,11 Yet, merging PCR with AST could offer swifter, more precise treatments that might improve outcomes.

To conclude, for those with recurrent or intricate UTIs, PCR testing could be advantageous. PCR is quicker and boasts greater accuracy than traditional cultures, which may not detect certain bacteria. The combined potential of PCR and AST, if further researched, might offer swifter and more precise treatments, potentially elevating patient results.

References

  1. Medina M, Castillo-Pino E. An introduction to the epidemiology and burden of urinary tract infections. Ther Adv Urol. 2019;11:1756287219832172. doi:10.1177/1756287219832172
  2. Anger J, Lee U, Ackerman AL, et al. Recurrent uncomplicated urinary tract infections in women: AUA/CUA/SUFU guideline. J Urol. 2019;202(2)282-289. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000000296
  3. Geerlings SE. Clinical presentations and epidemiology of urinary tract infections. Microbiol Spectr. 2016;4(5): 10.1128/microbiolspec.UTI-0002-2012. doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.UTI-0002-2012
  4. Heytens S, De Sutter A, Coorevits L, et al. Women with symptoms of a urinary tract infection but a negative urine culture: PCR-based quantification of Escherichia coli suggests infection in most cases. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2017;23(9):647-652. doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2017.04.004
  5. Naber KG, Schito G, Botto H, Palou J, Mazzei T. Surveillance study in Europe and Brazil on clinical aspects and Antimicrobial Resistance Epidemiology in Females with Cystitis (ARESC): implications for empiric therapy. Eur Urol. 2008;54(5):1164-1175. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2008.05.010
  6. Hilt EE, McKinley K, Pearce MM, et al. Urine is not sterile: use of enhanced urine culture techniques to detect resident bacterial flora in the adult female bladder. J Clin Microbiol. 2014; 52(3):871-876. doi:10.1128/JCM.02876-13
  7. Neugent ML, Hulyalkar NV, Nguyen VH, Zimmern PE, De Nisco NJ. Advances in understanding the human urinary microbiome and its potential role in urinary tract infection. mBio. 2020;11(2):e00218-20. doi:10.1128/mBio.00218-20
  8. Wojno KJ, Baunoch D, Luke N, et al. Multiplex PCR based urinary tract infection (UTI) analysis compared to traditional urine culture in identifying significant pathogens in symptomatic patients. Urology. 2020;136:119-126. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2019.10.018
  9. Melnyk AI, Toal C, Glass Clark S, Bradley M. Home urinary tract infection testing: patient experience and satisfaction with polymerase chain reaction kit. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;1-6. doi:10.1007/s00192-022-05309-z
  10. Baunoch D, Luke N, Wang D, et al. Concordance between antibiotic resistance genes and susceptibility in symptomatic urinary tract infections. Infect Drug Resist. 2021;14:3275-3286. doi:10.2147/IDR.S323095
  11. Daly A, Baunoch D, Rehling K, et al. Utilization of M-PCR and P-AST for diagnosis and management of urinary tract infections in home-based primary care. JOJ Urology & Nephrology. 2020;7(2):555707. doi:10.19080/JOJUN.2020.07.555707