MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.3201/eid2203.150928

Медицинская библиотека · Emerging infectious diseases · 2016

Underestimation of Invasive Meningococcal Disease in Italy.

Azzari Chiara, Nieddu Francesco, Moriondo Maria, Indolfi Giuseppe, Canessa Clementina, Ricci Silvia, Bianchi Leila, Serranti Daniele, Poggi Giovanni Maria, Resti Massimo

Клинический случайСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

Knowing the incidence of invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) is essential for planning appropriate vaccination policies. However, IMD may be underestimated because of misdiagnosis or insufficiently sensitive laboratory methods. Using a national molecular surveillance register, we assessed the number of cases misdiagnosed and diagnoses obtained postmortem with real-time PCR (rPCR), and we compared sensitivity of rPCR versus culture-based testing. A total of 222 IMD cases were identified: 11 (42%) of 26 fatal cases had been misdiagnosed or undiagnosed and were reclassified as IMD after rPCR showed meningococcal DNA in all available specimens taken postmortem. Of the samples tested with both rPCR and culture, 58% were diagnosed by using rPCR alone. The underestimation factor associated with the use of culture alone was 3.28. In countries such as Italy, where rPCR is in limited use, IMD incidence may be largely underestimated; thus, assessments of benefits of meningococcal vaccination may be prone to error.

Для цитирования: Azzari Chiara, Nieddu Francesco, Moriondo Maria, Indolfi Giuseppe, Canessa Clementina, Ricci Silvia, Bianchi Leila, Serranti Daniele, Poggi Giovanni Maria, Resti Massimo. Underestimation of Invasive Meningococcal Disease in Italy.. Emerging infectious diseases. 2016. DOI: 10.3201/eid2203.150928.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.