4.7 Review

Practical issues in implementing whole-genome-sequencing in routine diagnostic microbiology

期刊

CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTION
卷 24, 期 4, 页码 355-360

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2017.11.001

关键词

Antimicrobial resistance; Bacterial typing; Clinical microbiology; Diagnostic stewardship; Molecular diagnostics; Next generation sequencing; Quality control; Whole genome sequencing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Next generation sequencing (NGS) is increasingly being used in clinical microbiology. Like every new technology adopted in microbiology, the integration of NGS into clinical and routine workflows must be carefully managed. Aim: To review the practical aspects of implementing bacterial whole genome sequencing (WGS) in routine diagnostic laboratories. Sources: Review of the literature and expert opinion. Content: In this review, we discuss when and how to integrate whole genome sequencing (WGS) in the routine workflow of the clinical laboratory. In addition, as the microbiology laboratories have to adhere to various national and international regulations and criteria for their accreditation, we deliberate on quality control issues for using WGS in microbiology, including the importance of proficiency testing. Furthermore, the current and future place of this technology in the diagnostic hierarchy of microbiology is described as well as the necessity of maintaining backwards compatibility with already established methods. Finally, we speculate on the question of whether WGS can entirely replace routine microbiology in the future and the tension between the fact that most sequencers are designed to process multiple samples in parallel whereas for optimal diagnosis a one-by-one processing of the samples is preferred. Special reference is made to the cost and turnaround time of WGS in diagnostic laboratories. (C) 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据