The Journal of infection · 2015
Molecular diagnosis of Legionella infections--Clinical utility of front-line screening as part of a pneumonia diagnostic algorithm.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Gadsby Naomi J, Helgason Kristjan O, Dickson Elizabeth M, Mills Jonathan M, Lindsay Diane S J, Edwards Giles F, Hanson Mary F, Templeton Kate E, ESCMID Study Group for Molecular Diagnostics, ESCMID Study Group for Legionella Infections, Basel, Switzerland
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Urinary antigen testing for Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 is the leading rapid diagnostic test for Legionnaires' Disease (LD); however other Legionella species and serogroups can also cause LD. The aim was to determine the utility of front-line L. pneumophila and Legionella species PCR in a severe respiratory infection algorithm.
METHODS: L. pneumophila and Legionella species duplex real-time PCR was carried out on 1944 specimens from hospitalised patients over a 4 year period in Edinburgh, UK.
RESULTS: L. pneumophila was detected by PCR in 49 (2.7%) specimens from 36 patients. During a LD outbreak, combined L. pneumophila respiratory PCR and urinary antigen testing had optimal sensitivity and specificity (92.6% and 98.3% respectively) for the detection of confirmed cases. Legionella species was detected by PCR in 16 (0.9%) specimens from 10 patients. The 5 confirmed and 1 probable cases of Legionella longbeachae LD were both PCR and antibody positive.
CONCLUSIONS: Front-line L. pneumophila and Legionella species PCR is a valuable addition to urinary antigen testing as part of a well-defined algorithm. Cases of LD due to L. longbeachae might be considered laboratory-confirmed when there is a positive Legionella species PCR result and detection of L. longbeachae specific antibody response.
METHODS: L. pneumophila and Legionella species duplex real-time PCR was carried out on 1944 specimens from hospitalised patients over a 4 year period in Edinburgh, UK.
RESULTS: L. pneumophila was detected by PCR in 49 (2.7%) specimens from 36 patients. During a LD outbreak, combined L. pneumophila respiratory PCR and urinary antigen testing had optimal sensitivity and specificity (92.6% and 98.3% respectively) for the detection of confirmed cases. Legionella species was detected by PCR in 16 (0.9%) specimens from 10 patients. The 5 confirmed and 1 probable cases of Legionella longbeachae LD were both PCR and antibody positive.
CONCLUSIONS: Front-line L. pneumophila and Legionella species PCR is a valuable addition to urinary antigen testing as part of a well-defined algorithm. Cases of LD due to L. longbeachae might be considered laboratory-confirmed when there is a positive Legionella species PCR result and detection of L. longbeachae specific antibody response.