Epidemic Intelligence Service, Meningitis and Vaccine Preventable Diseases Branch, Division of Bacterial Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA.
Pediatrics. 2012 Feb;129(2):e424-30. doi: 10.1542/peds.2011-1710. Epub 2012 Jan 16.
We investigated a pertussis outbreak characterized by atypical cases, confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) alone at a single laboratory, which persisted despite high vaccine coverage and routine control measures. We aimed to determine whether Bordetella pertussis was the causative agent and advise on control interventions.
We conducted case ascertainment, confirmatory testing for pertussis and other pathogens, and an assessment for possible sources of specimen contamination, including a survey of clinic practices, sampling clinics for B pertussis DNA, and review of laboratory quality indicators.
Between November 28, 2008, and September 4, 2009, 125 cases were reported, of which 92 (74%) were PCR positive. Cases occurring after April 2009 (n = 79; 63%) had fewer classic pertussis symptoms (63% vs 98%; P < .01), smaller amounts of B pertussis DNA (mean PCR cycle threshold value: 40.9 vs 33.1; P < .01), and a greater proportion of PCR-positive results (34% vs 6%; P < .01). Cultures and serology for B pertussis were negative. Other common respiratory pathogens were detected. We identified factors that likely resulted in specimen contamination at the point of collection: environmentally present B pertussis DNA in clinics from vaccine, clinic standard specimen collection practices, use of liquid transport medium, and lack of clinically relevant PCR cutoffs.
A summer pertussis pseudo-outbreak, multifactorial in cause, likely occurred. Recommendations beyond standard practice were made to providers on specimen collection and environmental cleaning, and to laboratories on standardizing PCR protocols and reporting results, to minimize false-positive results from contaminated clinical specimens.
我们调查了一起由单一实验室通过聚合酶链反应(PCR)单独确诊的不典型百日咳暴发事件,尽管疫苗接种率高且采取了常规控制措施,但该暴发仍持续存在。我们旨在确定百日咳博德特氏菌是否为病原体,并提供控制干预建议。
我们进行了病例确定、百日咳和其他病原体的确认性检测,以及对标本污染可能来源的评估,包括对诊所实践的调查、采集博德特氏菌 DNA 的诊所样本,以及对实验室质量指标的审查。
2008 年 11 月 28 日至 2009 年 9 月 4 日期间报告了 125 例病例,其中 92 例(74%)PCR 阳性。2009 年 4 月后发生的病例(n=79;63%)具有较少的典型百日咳症状(63%对 98%;P<.01)、更少的博德特氏菌 DNA 量(平均 PCR 循环阈值:40.9 对 33.1;P<.01)和更高比例的 PCR 阳性结果(34%对 6%;P<.01)。博德特氏菌培养和血清学均为阴性。检测到其他常见呼吸道病原体。我们确定了在采集点导致标本污染的可能因素:疫苗中存在环境博德特氏菌 DNA、诊所标准标本采集实践、使用液体运输介质以及缺乏临床相关 PCR 截止值。
很可能发生了夏季百日咳假暴发,其病因是多因素的。我们向提供者就标本采集和环境清洁提出了超出标准实践的建议,并向实验室提出了标准化 PCR 方案和报告结果的建议,以尽量减少来自污染临床标本的假阳性结果。