Jacques Fourgeaud , Chiêu-Ân Nguyen , Tiffany Guilleminot , Yves Ville , Marianne Leruez-Ville
{"title":"妊娠早期巨细胞病毒原发性感染的两种血清学筛查策略的比较","authors":"Jacques Fourgeaud , Chiêu-Ân Nguyen , Tiffany Guilleminot , Yves Ville , Marianne Leruez-Ville","doi":"10.1016/j.jcv.2023.105614","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>CMV serology screening in the first trimester pregnancy is based on IgG and IgM testing followed by IgG avidity in cases with positive IgM. However, the sensitivity of this strategy to diagnose maternal primary infection has been questioned. The objective of the study was to compare this strategy 1 with a strategy 2 consisting of running avidity test on all samples with positive IgG (ignoring IgM results) using fully automated current generation CMV IgG, IgM and IgG avidity assays.</p></div><div><h3>Population and methods</h3><p>1516 consecutive pregnant women between 12 and 14 weeks were screened in one maternity. Strategy 1 was done prospectively with LIAISON® CMV IgG II and LIAISON® CMV IgM II, followed by LIAISON® CMV IgG Avidity II and VIDAS® CMV IgG avidity II testing in cases with positive or equivocal IgM. Strategy 2 was done retrospectively on the same population and consisted of running avidity with the LIAISON® CMV IgG Avidity II in all samples with positive IgG.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The sensitivity to diagnose a confirmed or a possible maternal primary infection in the first trimester was 91.6 % and 83 % for strategy 1 and 2 respectively (<em>p</em> > 0.99). Strategy 1 missed one possible primary infection and strategy 2 missed 2 confirmed primary infection. Inconclusive results happened in 0 and 0.7 % of samples with strategy 1 and 2 respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study suggests that strategy 1 has better sensitivity and practicability than strategy 2. However, to achieve a good performance with strategy 1, using highly sensitive IgM assay is mandatory.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Virology","volume":"169 ","pages":"Article 105614"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of two serological screening strategies for cytomegalovirus primary infection in the first trimester of pregnancy\",\"authors\":\"Jacques Fourgeaud , Chiêu-Ân Nguyen , Tiffany Guilleminot , Yves Ville , Marianne Leruez-Ville\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcv.2023.105614\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>CMV serology screening in the first trimester pregnancy is based on IgG and IgM testing followed by IgG avidity in cases with positive IgM. However, the sensitivity of this strategy to diagnose maternal primary infection has been questioned. The objective of the study was to compare this strategy 1 with a strategy 2 consisting of running avidity test on all samples with positive IgG (ignoring IgM results) using fully automated current generation CMV IgG, IgM and IgG avidity assays.</p></div><div><h3>Population and methods</h3><p>1516 consecutive pregnant women between 12 and 14 weeks were screened in one maternity. Strategy 1 was done prospectively with LIAISON® CMV IgG II and LIAISON® CMV IgM II, followed by LIAISON® CMV IgG Avidity II and VIDAS® CMV IgG avidity II testing in cases with positive or equivocal IgM. Strategy 2 was done retrospectively on the same population and consisted of running avidity with the LIAISON® CMV IgG Avidity II in all samples with positive IgG.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The sensitivity to diagnose a confirmed or a possible maternal primary infection in the first trimester was 91.6 % and 83 % for strategy 1 and 2 respectively (<em>p</em> > 0.99). Strategy 1 missed one possible primary infection and strategy 2 missed 2 confirmed primary infection. Inconclusive results happened in 0 and 0.7 % of samples with strategy 1 and 2 respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study suggests that strategy 1 has better sensitivity and practicability than strategy 2. However, to achieve a good performance with strategy 1, using highly sensitive IgM assay is mandatory.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Virology\",\"volume\":\"169 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105614\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Virology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1386653223002378\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VIROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Virology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1386653223002378","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VIROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of two serological screening strategies for cytomegalovirus primary infection in the first trimester of pregnancy
Introduction
CMV serology screening in the first trimester pregnancy is based on IgG and IgM testing followed by IgG avidity in cases with positive IgM. However, the sensitivity of this strategy to diagnose maternal primary infection has been questioned. The objective of the study was to compare this strategy 1 with a strategy 2 consisting of running avidity test on all samples with positive IgG (ignoring IgM results) using fully automated current generation CMV IgG, IgM and IgG avidity assays.
Population and methods
1516 consecutive pregnant women between 12 and 14 weeks were screened in one maternity. Strategy 1 was done prospectively with LIAISON® CMV IgG II and LIAISON® CMV IgM II, followed by LIAISON® CMV IgG Avidity II and VIDAS® CMV IgG avidity II testing in cases with positive or equivocal IgM. Strategy 2 was done retrospectively on the same population and consisted of running avidity with the LIAISON® CMV IgG Avidity II in all samples with positive IgG.
Results
The sensitivity to diagnose a confirmed or a possible maternal primary infection in the first trimester was 91.6 % and 83 % for strategy 1 and 2 respectively (p > 0.99). Strategy 1 missed one possible primary infection and strategy 2 missed 2 confirmed primary infection. Inconclusive results happened in 0 and 0.7 % of samples with strategy 1 and 2 respectively.
Conclusion
This study suggests that strategy 1 has better sensitivity and practicability than strategy 2. However, to achieve a good performance with strategy 1, using highly sensitive IgM assay is mandatory.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Clinical Virology, an esteemed international publication, serves as the official journal for both the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology and The European Society for Clinical Virology. Dedicated to advancing the understanding of human virology in clinical settings, the Journal of Clinical Virology focuses on disseminating research papers and reviews pertaining to the clinical aspects of virology. Its scope encompasses articles discussing diagnostic methodologies and virus-induced clinical conditions, with an emphasis on practicality and relevance to clinical practice.
The journal publishes on topics that include:
• new diagnostic technologies
• nucleic acid amplification and serologic testing
• targeted and metagenomic next-generation sequencing
• emerging pandemic viral threats
• respiratory viruses
• transplant viruses
• chronic viral infections
• cancer-associated viruses
• gastrointestinal viruses
• central nervous system viruses
• one health (excludes animal health)