tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
J Clin Microbiol. 2010 Aug 11. [Epub ahead of print]
Comparison of Combined Nose-Throat Swabs with Nasopharyngeal Aspirates for Detection of Pandemic Influenza A/H1N1 2009 Virus by Real-time RT-PCR.
Ortiz de la Tabla V, Masi? M, Antequera P, Martin C, Gazquez G, Bu?uel F, Guti?rrez F.
Microbiology Service, Hospital Universitario de San Juan, Alicante, Spain; Infectious Diseases Unit, Hospital General Universitario de Elche, Alicante, Spain; Department of Clinical Medicine, University Miguel Hern?ndez, Alicante, Spain.
Abstract
Objective: Data assessing the diagnostic accuracy of different respiratory samples for the detection of the novel influenza A/H1N1 2009 virus by molecular methods are lacking. The objective of the study was to compare the sensitivity of combined nose and throat swabs (CNTS) with that of nasopharyngeal aspirates (NPA). Methods: Prospective study of adults and children with suspected influenza. Real-time reverse-transcriptase-PCR testing was used for the virological diagnosis. Results: Of the 2473 patients included, 264 with paired CNTS and NPA were randomly selected. Novel influenza A/H1N1 virus was identified in at least one sample in 115 (43.6%) patients, the majority of them young adults. In 109 (94.8%) patients the virus was identified in the CNTS, and in 98 (85.2%) in the NPA (P=0.02). In 93 (80.1%) patients, the virus was identified in both specimens. Spearman's rho correlation coefficient between the two methods was 0.82 (P<0.001). There were no significant differences in accuracy between the specimens when patients were stratified according to demographic or clinical characteristics except in the case of women, in whom the sensitivity of CNTS was higher (P=0.01). The combination of CNTS and NPA had a significantly higher sensitivity in identifying the virus than did each method alone (P=0.02 for the comparison of the combination of both sampling methods with CNTS, and P<0.001 for the comparison with NPA). Conclusion: In patients with the novel influenza A/H1N1 virus, the diagnostic yield of CNTS is higher than that of NPA. The combination of both sampling methods increases the likelihood of diagnosing the virus.
PMID: 20702662 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20702662
Comparison of Combined Nose-Throat Swabs with Nasopharyngeal Aspirates for Detection of Pandemic Influenza A/H1N1 2009 Virus by Real-time RT-PCR.
Ortiz de la Tabla V, Masi? M, Antequera P, Martin C, Gazquez G, Bu?uel F, Guti?rrez F.
Microbiology Service, Hospital Universitario de San Juan, Alicante, Spain; Infectious Diseases Unit, Hospital General Universitario de Elche, Alicante, Spain; Department of Clinical Medicine, University Miguel Hern?ndez, Alicante, Spain.
Abstract
Objective: Data assessing the diagnostic accuracy of different respiratory samples for the detection of the novel influenza A/H1N1 2009 virus by molecular methods are lacking. The objective of the study was to compare the sensitivity of combined nose and throat swabs (CNTS) with that of nasopharyngeal aspirates (NPA). Methods: Prospective study of adults and children with suspected influenza. Real-time reverse-transcriptase-PCR testing was used for the virological diagnosis. Results: Of the 2473 patients included, 264 with paired CNTS and NPA were randomly selected. Novel influenza A/H1N1 virus was identified in at least one sample in 115 (43.6%) patients, the majority of them young adults. In 109 (94.8%) patients the virus was identified in the CNTS, and in 98 (85.2%) in the NPA (P=0.02). In 93 (80.1%) patients, the virus was identified in both specimens. Spearman's rho correlation coefficient between the two methods was 0.82 (P<0.001). There were no significant differences in accuracy between the specimens when patients were stratified according to demographic or clinical characteristics except in the case of women, in whom the sensitivity of CNTS was higher (P=0.01). The combination of CNTS and NPA had a significantly higher sensitivity in identifying the virus than did each method alone (P=0.02 for the comparison of the combination of both sampling methods with CNTS, and P<0.001 for the comparison with NPA). Conclusion: In patients with the novel influenza A/H1N1 virus, the diagnostic yield of CNTS is higher than that of NPA. The combination of both sampling methods increases the likelihood of diagnosing the virus.
PMID: 20702662 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20702662