Culture and other direct detection methods to diagnose human granulocytic anaplasmosis.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Maria E Aguero-Rosenfeld, Lois Zentmaier, Dionysios Liveris, Paul Visintainer, Ira Schwartz, J Stephen Dumler, Gary P Wormser
{"title":"Culture and other direct detection methods to diagnose human granulocytic anaplasmosis.","authors":"Maria E Aguero-Rosenfeld, Lois Zentmaier, Dionysios Liveris, Paul Visintainer, Ira Schwartz, J Stephen Dumler, Gary P Wormser","doi":"10.1093/ajcp/aqae126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We sought to assess the performance of 3 laboratory tests on blood specimens for direct detection of Anaplasma phagocytophilum, the cause of human granulocytic anaplasmosis (HGA), in patients tested at a single medical institution in New York State.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Direct tests included microscopic blood smear examination for intragranulocytic inclusions, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and culture using the HL-60 cell line. The HGA cases testing positive by only 1 direct test were not included, unless HGA was confirmed by acute or convalescent serology using an indirect immunofluorescent assay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 1997 to 2009, 71 patients with HGA were diagnosed by at least 1 of the 3 direct test methods. For the subgroup of 55 patients who were tested using all 3 methods, culture was positive for 90.9% (50/55) vs 81.8% (45/55) for PCR vs 63.6% (35/55) for blood smear (P =.002). Most cultures (79.3%) were detected as positive within 1 week of incubation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although using culture to detect A phagocytophilum is likely not amenable for implementation in most hospital laboratories, in our experience, culture had the highest yield among the direct tests evaluated.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqae126","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: We sought to assess the performance of 3 laboratory tests on blood specimens for direct detection of Anaplasma phagocytophilum, the cause of human granulocytic anaplasmosis (HGA), in patients tested at a single medical institution in New York State.

Methods: Direct tests included microscopic blood smear examination for intragranulocytic inclusions, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and culture using the HL-60 cell line. The HGA cases testing positive by only 1 direct test were not included, unless HGA was confirmed by acute or convalescent serology using an indirect immunofluorescent assay.

Results: From 1997 to 2009, 71 patients with HGA were diagnosed by at least 1 of the 3 direct test methods. For the subgroup of 55 patients who were tested using all 3 methods, culture was positive for 90.9% (50/55) vs 81.8% (45/55) for PCR vs 63.6% (35/55) for blood smear (P =.002). Most cultures (79.3%) were detected as positive within 1 week of incubation.

Conclusions: Although using culture to detect A phagocytophilum is likely not amenable for implementation in most hospital laboratories, in our experience, culture had the highest yield among the direct tests evaluated.

用培养和其他直接检测方法诊断人类粒细胞无形体病。
目的:我们试图评估纽约州一家医疗机构对血液标本进行直接检测人类粒细胞无形体病(HGA)病原体噬细胞无形体的 3 种实验室检测方法的性能:直接检测包括显微镜血涂片检查粒细胞内包涵体、聚合酶链反应(PCR)和使用 HL-60 细胞系进行培养。仅通过一种直接检测呈阳性的 HGA 病例不包括在内,除非使用间接免疫荧光检测法通过急性期或恢复期血清学检查确认 HGA:结果:1997 年至 2009 年间,71 名 HGA 患者通过 3 种直接检测方法中的至少一种被确诊。在使用所有 3 种方法检测的 55 例患者中,培养阳性率为 90.9%(50/55),PCR 阳性率为 81.8%(45/55),血涂片阳性率为 63.6%(35/55)(P =.002)。大多数培养物(79.3%)在培养 1 周内检测出阳性:结论:尽管大多数医院实验室可能无法使用培养法检测噬细胞甲虫,但根据我们的经验,培养法在所评估的直接检测方法中检测率最高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信