Enteric Virus Unit, National Infection Service Laboratories, Public Health England, London, United Kingdom.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Euro Surveill. 2020 Oct;25(43). doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.43.1900375.
BackgroundRapid diagnostic tests are commonly used by hospital laboratories in England to detect rotavirus (RV), and results are used to inform clinical management and support national surveillance of the infant rotavirus immunisation programme since 2013. In 2017, the Public Health England (PHE) national reference laboratory for enteric viruses observed that the presence of RV could not be confirmed by PCR in a proportion of RV-positive samples referred for confirmatory detection.AimWe aimed to compare the positivity rate of detection methods used by hospital laboratories with the PHE confirmatory test rate.MethodsRotavirus specimens testing positive at local hospital laboratories were re-tested at the PHE national reference laboratory using a PCR test. Confirmatory results were compared to original results from the PHE laboratory information management system.ResultsHospital laboratories screened 70.1% (2,608/3,721) of RV samples using immunochromatographic assay (IC) or rapid tests, 15.5% (578/3,721) using enzyme immunoassays (EIA) and 14.4% (535/3,721) using PCR. Overall, 1,011/3,721 (27.2%) locally RV-positive samples referred to PHE in 2016 and 2017 failed RV detection using the PHE reference laboratory PCR test. Confirmation rates were 66.9% (1,746/2,608) for the IC tests, 87.4% (505/578) for the EIA and 86.4% (465/535) for the PCR assays. Seasonal confirmation rate discrepancies were also evident for IC tests.ConclusionsThis report highlights high false positive rates with the most commonly used RV screening tests and emphasises the importance of implementing verified confirmatory tests for RV detections. This has implications for clinical diagnosis and national surveillance.
英国医院实验室通常使用快速诊断检测来检测轮状病毒(RV),检测结果用于指导临床管理,并支持自 2013 年以来对婴儿轮状病毒免疫计划的国家监测。2017 年,英格兰公共卫生(PHE)肠道病毒国家参考实验室观察到,在送往确认检测的一部分 RV 阳性样本中,PCR 无法确认 RV 的存在。
比较医院实验室使用的检测方法的阳性检出率与 PHE 确认检测率。
使用 PCR 检测重新检测当地医院实验室检测为 RV 阳性的标本,将确认结果与 PHE 实验室信息管理系统中的原始结果进行比较。
医院实验室使用免疫层析法(IC)或快速检测法筛查了 70.1%(2608/3721)的 RV 样本,使用酶免疫分析法(EIA)筛查了 15.5%(578/3721)的 RV 样本,使用 PCR 筛查了 14.4%(535/3721)的 RV 样本。总体而言,2016 年和 2017 年,共有 1011/3721(27.2%)本地 RV 阳性样本被送往 PHE,使用 PHE 参考实验室 PCR 检测未能检测到 RV。IC 检测的确认率为 66.9%(1746/2608),EIA 为 87.4%(505/578),PCR 为 86.4%(465/535)。IC 检测的季节性确认率差异也很明显。
本报告强调了最常用的 RV 筛查检测存在较高的假阳性率,并强调了实施 RV 检测验证性确认检测的重要性。这对临床诊断和国家监测有影响。