Blair Janis E, Mendoza Neil, Force Shannon, Chang Yu-Hui H, Grys Thomas E
Division of Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.
Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2013 Jan;20(1):95-8. doi: 10.1128/CVI.00531-12. Epub 2012 Nov 15.
The diagnosis of coccidioidomycosis relies heavily on serologic test results in addition to clinical history, physical examination, and radiographic findings. Use of the enzyme immunoassay (EIA) has increased because it is rapidly performed and does not require referral to a reference laboratory, as do complement fixation and immunodiffusion tests. However, interpretation of immunoglobulin M (IgM) reactivity by EIA in the absence of immunoglobulin G (IgG) reactivity has been problematic. We conducted a retrospective medical record review of all patients with such IgM reactivity at our institution to identify situations where the finding was more likely to be clinically specific for coccidioidal infection. From 1 January 2004 through 31 December 2008, a total of 1,117 patients had positive EIA coccidioidal serology or EIA IgM-only reactivity; of these, 102 patients (9%) had EIA IgM-only reactivity. Among the 102 patients with EIA IgM-only reactivity, 60 were tested to evaluate symptomatic illness, 13 for follow-up of previously abnormal serology, and 29 for screening purposes. Of the 102 patients, 80 (78%) had positive serologic findings by other methods or had positive culture or histology. Fifty-four (90%) of the 60 patients whose serology was performed to evaluate symptomatic illness had coccidioidal infection, whereas 13 (45%) of 29 patients whose serology was performed for screening purposes had coccidioidal infection. Of the 102 patients with isolated IgM reactivity by EIA, 12 later seroconverted to IgG and IgM reactivity. The use of EIA for screening in 29 asymptomatic persons was associated with unconfirmable results in 13 (45%). Although the majority of patients in our study with isolated IgM reactivity by EIA had probable or confirmed coccidioidomycosis, this result must be interpreted with caution for asymptomatic patients.
球孢子菌病的诊断除了依靠临床病史、体格检查和影像学检查结果外,很大程度上还依赖血清学检测结果。酶免疫测定(EIA)的使用有所增加,因为它操作迅速,且不像补体结合试验和免疫扩散试验那样需要送检至参考实验室。然而,在缺乏免疫球蛋白G(IgG)反应性的情况下,通过EIA对免疫球蛋白M(IgM)反应性的解读一直存在问题。我们对本机构所有具有此类IgM反应性的患者进行了回顾性病历审查,以确定该结果更可能在临床上对球孢子菌感染具有特异性的情况。从2004年1月1日至2008年12月31日,共有1117例患者EIA球孢子菌血清学检测呈阳性或仅EIA IgM反应性呈阳性;其中,102例患者(9%)仅EIA IgM反应性呈阳性。在这102例仅EIA IgM反应性呈阳性的患者中,60例接受检测以评估症状性疾病,13例用于对先前异常血清学结果进行随访,29例用于筛查。在这102例患者中,80例(78%)通过其他方法血清学检测呈阳性或培养或组织学检查呈阳性。为评估症状性疾病而进行血清学检测的60例患者中,54例(90%)患有球孢子菌感染,而因筛查目的进行血清学检测的29例患者中,13例(45%)患有球孢子菌感染。在102例仅通过EIA呈IgM反应性的患者中,12例后来血清转化为IgG和IgM反应性。对29例无症状者使用EIA进行筛查,13例(45%)结果无法确认。尽管在我们的研究中,大多数仅通过EIA呈IgM反应性的患者可能患有或已确诊球孢子菌病,但对于无症状患者,这一结果必须谨慎解读。