Improvement of the diagnosis of intestinal protozoa using a multiplex qPCR strategy compared to classical microscopy: a prospective study on 3,500 stool samples over 3 years.

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 MICROBIOLOGY
Florence Robert-Gangneux, Xavier Duval, Clément Cazala, Sorya Belaz, Anne Dupuis, Hélène Guegan, Brice Autier, Jean-Pierre Gangneux
{"title":"Improvement of the diagnosis of intestinal protozoa using a multiplex qPCR strategy compared to classical microscopy: a prospective study on 3,500 stool samples over 3 years.","authors":"Florence Robert-Gangneux, Xavier Duval, Clément Cazala, Sorya Belaz, Anne Dupuis, Hélène Guegan, Brice Autier, Jean-Pierre Gangneux","doi":"10.1128/jcm.01610-24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Commercial multiplex real-time PCR (qPCR assays) are now widely used for the diagnosis of intestinal protozoan infections, but few prospective studies evaluated their performances on large patient cohorts. We extracted data from our information system from 1 January 2021 to 15 March 2024 and included all stool samples analyzed in routine. Parasites were searched using a multiplex PCR (AllPlex Gastrointestinal Panel assay, Seegene) and microscopic examination with two concentration methods. Acid-fast staining was performed when <i>Cryptosporidium</i> detection was specifically requested. In total, 3,495 stools were analyzed from 2,127 patients. <i>Giardia intestinalis</i>, <i>Cryptosporidium</i> spp., <i>Entamoeba histolytica</i>, <i>Dientamoeba fragilis,</i> and <i>Blastocystis</i> spp. were found by multiplex qPCR in 45 (1.28%), 30 (0.85%), 9 (0.25%), 310 (8.86%), and 673 (19.25%) samples, respectively, alone or in combination (<i>n</i> = 909). In the vast majority of cases, PCR detected a protozoan on the first stool sample. Microscopy was positive for <i>G. intestinalis</i>, <i>Cryptosporidium</i> spp., <i>Entamoeba histolytica/dispar</i>, <i>D. fragilis,</i> and <i>Blastocystis</i> spp. in 25 (0.7%), 8 (0.23%), 24 (0.68%), 22 (0.63%), and 229 (6.55%), samples, respectively, alone or in combination (<i>n</i> = 286 samples). No samples were PCR-/Microscopy+ for <i>G</i>. <i>intestinalis</i>, <i>Cryptosporidium</i> spp., and <i>E. histolytica</i>, while <i>D. fragilis</i> and <i>Blastocystis</i> spp. were detected only with microscopy in 6 and 20 samples, respectively. Microscopy allowed the detection of parasites not targeted by the multiplex panel (5 <i>Cystoisospora belli,</i> 331 samples with non-pathogenic protozoa, and 68 samples with helminths). Overall, the multiplex PCR proved more efficient to detect protozoan parasites, but a microscopic technique should be performed when infection with <i>C. belli</i> (HIV-infected patients) or helminths is suspected (migrants and travelers).IMPORTANCEIn the era of increasing use of multiplex PCR panels for the diagnosis of intestinal protozoan infections, it is important to form an opinion on the positioning of those assays within a lab workflow. This study analyzes routine results obtained prospectively by microscopy and a commercial multiplex PCR over 3 years, and shows that the assay meets the expectations of a clinical laboratory for the detection of protozoan parasites of medical interest. It is recalled that <i>Cystoisospora belli</i> is not targeted by the multiplex assay, and that microscopy still remains necessary to detect helminths.</p>","PeriodicalId":15511,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Microbiology","volume":" ","pages":"e0161024"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01610-24","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Commercial multiplex real-time PCR (qPCR assays) are now widely used for the diagnosis of intestinal protozoan infections, but few prospective studies evaluated their performances on large patient cohorts. We extracted data from our information system from 1 January 2021 to 15 March 2024 and included all stool samples analyzed in routine. Parasites were searched using a multiplex PCR (AllPlex Gastrointestinal Panel assay, Seegene) and microscopic examination with two concentration methods. Acid-fast staining was performed when Cryptosporidium detection was specifically requested. In total, 3,495 stools were analyzed from 2,127 patients. Giardia intestinalis, Cryptosporidium spp., Entamoeba histolytica, Dientamoeba fragilis, and Blastocystis spp. were found by multiplex qPCR in 45 (1.28%), 30 (0.85%), 9 (0.25%), 310 (8.86%), and 673 (19.25%) samples, respectively, alone or in combination (n = 909). In the vast majority of cases, PCR detected a protozoan on the first stool sample. Microscopy was positive for G. intestinalis, Cryptosporidium spp., Entamoeba histolytica/dispar, D. fragilis, and Blastocystis spp. in 25 (0.7%), 8 (0.23%), 24 (0.68%), 22 (0.63%), and 229 (6.55%), samples, respectively, alone or in combination (n = 286 samples). No samples were PCR-/Microscopy+ for G. intestinalis, Cryptosporidium spp., and E. histolytica, while D. fragilis and Blastocystis spp. were detected only with microscopy in 6 and 20 samples, respectively. Microscopy allowed the detection of parasites not targeted by the multiplex panel (5 Cystoisospora belli, 331 samples with non-pathogenic protozoa, and 68 samples with helminths). Overall, the multiplex PCR proved more efficient to detect protozoan parasites, but a microscopic technique should be performed when infection with C. belli (HIV-infected patients) or helminths is suspected (migrants and travelers).IMPORTANCEIn the era of increasing use of multiplex PCR panels for the diagnosis of intestinal protozoan infections, it is important to form an opinion on the positioning of those assays within a lab workflow. This study analyzes routine results obtained prospectively by microscopy and a commercial multiplex PCR over 3 years, and shows that the assay meets the expectations of a clinical laboratory for the detection of protozoan parasites of medical interest. It is recalled that Cystoisospora belli is not targeted by the multiplex assay, and that microscopy still remains necessary to detect helminths.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
Journal of Clinical Microbiology 医学-微生物学
CiteScore
17.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
347
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Microbiology® disseminates the latest research concerning the laboratory diagnosis of human and animal infections, along with the laboratory's role in epidemiology and the management of infectious diseases.
×
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