Comparison between RFLP and MIRU-VNTR Genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Strains Isolated in Stockholm 2009 to 2011

Our aim was to analyze the difference between methods for genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex isolates. We collected genotyping results from Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP) and Mycobacterial Interspersed Repetitive Units-Variable Numbers of Tandem Repeat (MIRU-VNTR) in a geographically limited area (Stockholm) during a period of three years. The number and proportion of isolates belonging to clusters was reduced by 45 and 35% respectively when combining the two methods compared with using RFLP or MIRU-VNTR only. The mean size of the clusters was smaller when combining methods and smaller with RFLP compared to MIRU-VNTR. In clusters with confirmed epidemiological links RFLP coincided slightly better than MIRU-VNTR but where there was a difference, the variation in MIRU-VNTR pattern was only in a single locus. In isolates with few IS6110 bands in RFLP, MIRU-VNTR differentiated the isolates more, dividing the RFLP clusters. Since MIRU-VNTR is faster and less labour-intensive it is the method of choice for routine genotyping. In most cases it will be sufficient for epidemiological purposes but true clustering might still be considered if there are epidemiological links and the MIRU-VNTR results differ in only one of its 24 loci.