Pitfalls of rubella serology while on the brink of elimination: evaluation of national data, Belgium, 2017.

Sofie Colman, Kris Vernelen, Bernard China, Dorien Van den Bossche, Laura Cornelissen, Marie-Luce Delforge, Marijke Reynders, Mario Berth, Melissa Depypere, Natasja Van Gasse, Sara Vijgen, Jos Van Acker, An Boel, Elizaveta Padalko
{"title":"Pitfalls of rubella serology while on the brink of elimination: evaluation of national data, Belgium, 2017.","authors":"Sofie Colman,&nbsp;Kris Vernelen,&nbsp;Bernard China,&nbsp;Dorien Van den Bossche,&nbsp;Laura Cornelissen,&nbsp;Marie-Luce Delforge,&nbsp;Marijke Reynders,&nbsp;Mario Berth,&nbsp;Melissa Depypere,&nbsp;Natasja Van Gasse,&nbsp;Sara Vijgen,&nbsp;Jos Van Acker,&nbsp;An Boel,&nbsp;Elizaveta Padalko","doi":"10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.20.2000074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundIn Belgium, rubella serology is frequently requested in women of childbearing age, despite high vaccination coverage and a near-absence of congenital rubella cases. Different test kits are available and should be standardised by an international standard preparation.AimTo analyse and compare rubella serology practices in Belgian laboratories.MethodsAs part of the mandatory External Quality Assessment programme for rubella serology in Belgium, the national public health institute, Sciensano, sent a voluntary questionnaire concerning anti-rubella IgM/IgG analyses in women aged 15 to 45 years in 2017 to 130 laboratories.ResultsThe questionnaire response rate was 83.8% (109/130). The majority of 169,494 IgG analyses were performed on Roche (55%), Abbott (17%) and Diasorin (13%) analysers. Not all laboratories used the proposed international cut-off of 10 IU/mL. Assumed median seroprevalence ranged from 76.3% with Liaison (Diasorin) to 96.3% with Modular (Roche). Despite very low rubella incidence in Belgium, 93 laboratories performed 85,957 IgM analyses, with 748 positive and 394 grey zone results. The National Reference Centre for Measles, Mumps and Rubella virus and the National Reference Centre for Congenital infections did not confirm any positive rubella cases in 2017.ConclusionThis retrospective analysis shows that rubella serology results may differ considerably according to the assay used. It is therefore important to use the same test when comparing results or performing follow-up testing. The number of anti-rubella IgM analyses was very high. Incorrect use of IgM for screening women of childbearing age can lead to unwarranted anxiety and overuse of confirmation tests.</p>","PeriodicalId":520613,"journal":{"name":"Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8138961/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.20.2000074","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

BackgroundIn Belgium, rubella serology is frequently requested in women of childbearing age, despite high vaccination coverage and a near-absence of congenital rubella cases. Different test kits are available and should be standardised by an international standard preparation.AimTo analyse and compare rubella serology practices in Belgian laboratories.MethodsAs part of the mandatory External Quality Assessment programme for rubella serology in Belgium, the national public health institute, Sciensano, sent a voluntary questionnaire concerning anti-rubella IgM/IgG analyses in women aged 15 to 45 years in 2017 to 130 laboratories.ResultsThe questionnaire response rate was 83.8% (109/130). The majority of 169,494 IgG analyses were performed on Roche (55%), Abbott (17%) and Diasorin (13%) analysers. Not all laboratories used the proposed international cut-off of 10 IU/mL. Assumed median seroprevalence ranged from 76.3% with Liaison (Diasorin) to 96.3% with Modular (Roche). Despite very low rubella incidence in Belgium, 93 laboratories performed 85,957 IgM analyses, with 748 positive and 394 grey zone results. The National Reference Centre for Measles, Mumps and Rubella virus and the National Reference Centre for Congenital infections did not confirm any positive rubella cases in 2017.ConclusionThis retrospective analysis shows that rubella serology results may differ considerably according to the assay used. It is therefore important to use the same test when comparing results or performing follow-up testing. The number of anti-rubella IgM analyses was very high. Incorrect use of IgM for screening women of childbearing age can lead to unwarranted anxiety and overuse of confirmation tests.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

处于消除边缘的风疹血清学陷阱:对国家数据的评估,比利时,2017年。
背景在比利时,尽管疫苗接种率高且几乎没有先天性风疹病例,育龄妇女仍经常要求进行风疹血清学检查。有不同的检测试剂盒可用,并应通过国际标准编制进行标准化。目的分析比较比利时实验室风疹血清学实践。方法作为比利时风疹血清学强制性外部质量评估项目的一部分,国家公共卫生研究所Sciensano于2017年向130个实验室发送了一份关于15 - 45岁女性抗风疹IgM/IgG分析的自愿问卷。结果问卷回复率为83.8%(109/130)。169,494例IgG分析中,大部分在罗氏(55%)、雅培(17%)和Diasorin(13%)分析仪上进行。并不是所有的实验室都使用建议的10 IU/mL的国际临界值。假定中位血清阳性率从Liaison (Diasorin)的76.3%到Modular(罗氏)的96.3%不等。尽管比利时风疹发病率非常低,但93个实验室进行了85,957次IgM分析,其中748次为阳性,394次为灰色地带。2017年,麻疹、腮腺炎和风疹病毒国家参考中心和先天性感染国家参考中心未确认任何风疹阳性病例。结论回顾性分析表明,风疹血清学结果可能根据所使用的检测方法而有很大差异。因此,在比较结果或进行后续测试时,使用相同的测试是很重要的。抗风疹IgM分析的数量非常高。不正确地使用IgM筛查育龄妇女可导致不必要的焦虑和过度使用确认测试。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信