Microbiology Service, Hospital Universitario de San Juan, Alicante, Spain.
J Clin Microbiol. 2010 Oct;48(10):3492-5. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01105-10. Epub 2010 Aug 11.
Data assessing the diagnostic accuracies of use of different respiratory samples for the detection of the novel influenza A/H1N1 2009 virus by molecular methods are lacking. The objective of this study was to compare the sensitivity of combined nose and throat swabs (CNTS) with that of nasopharyngeal aspirates (NPA). This was a prospective study of adults and children with suspected influenza. Real-time reverse transcriptase PCR testing was used for the virological diagnosis. Of the 2,473 patients included, 264 with paired CNTS and NPA were randomly selected. Novel influenza A/H1N1 virus was identified in at least one sample for 115 (43.6%) patients, the majority of them young adults. In 109 patients (94.8%) the virus was identified in the CNTS, and in 98 (85.2%) it was identified in the NPA (P = 0.02). In 93 patients (80.1%), 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). We conclude that 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.
评估使用不同呼吸道样本通过分子方法检测新型甲型 H1N1 流感病毒的诊断准确性的数据缺乏。本研究的目的是比较联合鼻咽拭子(CNTS)和鼻咽抽吸物(NPA)的敏感性。这是一项对疑似流感的成人和儿童进行的前瞻性研究。实时逆转录聚合酶链反应检测用于病毒学诊断。在 2473 例患者中,随机选择了 264 例具有配对 CNTS 和 NPA 的患者。至少有一个样本中发现了新型甲型 H1N1 病毒的患者有 115 例(43.6%),其中大多数为年轻成年人。在 109 例患者(94.8%)中,CNTS 中鉴定出病毒,在 98 例(85.2%)中 NPA 中鉴定出病毒(P = 0.02)。在 93 例患者(80.1%)中,两种标本均鉴定出病毒。两种方法之间的斯皮尔曼等级相关系数为 0.82(P < 0.001)。除女性外,根据人口统计学或临床特征对患者进行分层时,两种标本的准确性没有差异,在女性中,CNTS 的敏感性更高(P = 0.01)。CNTS 和 NPA 的联合使用在识别病毒方面的敏感性明显高于单独使用每种方法(与 CNTS 相比,两种采样方法联合使用的比较 P = 0.02,与 NPA 相比 P < 0.001)。我们得出结论,在新型甲型 H1N1 流感病毒感染患者中,CNTS 的诊断效果高于 NPA。两种采样方法的联合使用增加了诊断病毒的可能性。