doi:10.1016/j.femsim.2005.03.011
Copyright © 2005 Federation of European Microbiological Societies Published by Elsevier B.V.
Periodontal pathogens: A quantitative comparison of anaerobic culture and real-time PCR
Khalil Boutagaa, Arie Jan van Winkelhoffa, Christina M.J.E. Vandenbroucke-Graulsb and Paul H.M. Savelkoulb,
, 
aDepartment of Oral Microbiology, Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam, VU University Medical Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
bUniversiteit van Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit, Department of Medical Microbiology and Infection Control, VU University Medical Center, P.O. Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Received 1 February 2005;
revised 21 March 2005;
accepted 25 March 2005.
Available online 5 May 2005.
This article is not included in your organization's subscription. However, you may be able to
access this article under your organization's agreement with Elsevier.
Abstract
Periodontitis is a multi-factorial chronic inflammatory and destructive disease of the tooth-supporting tissues. Quantitative anaerobic culture techniques have been used for microbial diagnosis of the different forms of the disease. The aim of this study was to compare real-time PCR with quantitative anaerobic culture for detection and quantification of 5 prominent periodontal pathogens. Real-time PCR assays with the 16s rRNA genes of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans, Prevotella intermedia, Tannerella forsythensis, Peptostreptococcus micros and Fusobacterium spp. were developed. The PCR was validated on pure cultures of various bacterial strains. Subsequently, subgingival plaque samples from 259 adult patients with periodontitis were analyzed with quantitative anaerobic culture and real-time PCR. A standard curve for DNA quantification was created for each primer-probe set based on colony-forming units equivalents.
All bacterial species were correctly identified. The lower limits of detection by PCR varied between 1–50 colony-forming units equivalents depending on the species. No cross-reactivities with heterologous DNA of other bacterial species were observed. Real-time PCR results showed a high degree of agreement with anaerobic culture results. Real-time PCR is a reliable alternative for diagnostic quantitative anaerobic culture of subgingival plaque samples.
Keywords: Periodontitis; Subgingival plaque; Quantitative real-time PCR; Anaerobic culture
Article Outline
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Materials and methods
- 2.1. Study population and sample collection
- 2.2. Microbiological procedures
- 2.2.1. Identification of anaerobic isolates
- 2.2.2. Growth of reference strains
- 2.3. DNA isolation from plaque samples and bacterial reference cultures
- 2.4. Validation of the real-time PCR
- 2.4.1. Design of PCR primers and probes
- 2.4.2. Validation of the primer/probe sets for real-time PCR
- 2.4.3. Inhibition
- 2.5. Genome sequence analysis
- 2.6. Statistics
- 3. Results
- 3.1. Sensitivity and specificity of TaqMan assay
- 3.2. Reproducibility and reliability
- 3.3. DNA isolation and PCR inhibition controls
- 3.4. Real-time PCR versus anaerobic culture
- 4. Discussion
- Acknowledgements
- References
Fig. 1. Real-time PCR vs. anaerobic culture in PCR-culture positive subgingival plaque samples. A quantitative comparison was made between the number of target bacterial cells determined by anaerobic culture and real-time PCR in the PCR-culture positive samples. Differences in cell number were compared and three groups were identified (x-axis): less than 10-fold, 10- to 100-fold and >100-fold differences in cell number. The y-axis shows the percentage of agreement between the PCR and culture technique.
Fig. 2. Scatter plots showing the differences and correlations between the real-time PCR and the anaerobic culture method for (a) A. actinomycetemcomitans, (b) T. forsythensis, (c) Fusobacterium spp., (d) P. intermedia and (e) P. micros. Samples that were PCR positive and culture negative fall near the x axis. A second linearity coefficient (R2) was calculated only for the quantitative results for the positive samples with both methods.
Table 1.
Primers and fluorogenic probes for the specific detection of the five pathogens

Table 2.
Comparison of detection of five periodontal pathogens in 259 periodontitis patients
a Includes
Prevotella intermedia and
Prevotella nigrescens.
b Five of the 29 samples which were PCR negative/culture positive.
Table 3.
Effect of choice of reference standard on the percentage sensitivity and specificity of both real-timer PCR and anaerobic culture
a Sensitivity = number of positive samples by PCR and culture/number of positive samples by culture, specificity = number of negative samples by PCR and culture/number of negative samples by culture.
b Sensitivity = number of positive samples by PCR and culture/number of positive samples by PCR, specificity = number of negative samples by PCR and culture/number of negative samples by PCR.