Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, S7N 0W8, Canada.
BMC Infect Dis. 2021 Mar 21;21(1):288. doi: 10.1186/s12879-021-05986-z.
Many clinicians are aware that certain therapies administered to their patients can have downstream consequences in the form of clinical laboratory test interferences. This is particularly true of laboratory tests that depend on, or directly involve the use of, antibody-based methodology. Intravenously-administered immunoglobulin therapy is one such treatment that can in theory directly impact the results of particular tests in the area of viral serology. This study can help serve as a reference for clinicians researching the impact of intravenously-administered immunoglobulin therapy in the context of positive results that do not reflect the clinical background of the patient.
We describe a case whereby an intravenously-administered immunoglobulin therapy led to a series of clinical false positives in viral serology, inconsistent with the known patient history as well as recent laboratory results. The patient presented to hospital with petechiae-type bleeding rashes and was investigated for thrombocytopenia after initial blood investigations indicated very low platelets. Subsequent testing of the potential causes for low-platelet involved several viral serology investigations, including hepatitis, cytomegalovirus and human immunodeficiency virus. Initial testing indicated patient exhibited negative status for all viral antibodies and antigens (except immunity for hepatitis B surface antigen antibody). As part of the thrombocytopenia treatment, intravenously-administered immunoglobulin therapy was administered, and subsequent viral serology was ordered. These investigations indicated a positive status for several hepatitis antibodies as well as cytomegalovirus.
This case study illustrates the potential for improper diagnosis of previous or ongoing infection status in patients administered IVIg therapy. Caution should be exercised particularly when interpreting results involving cytomegalovirus and hepatitis.
许多临床医生都知道,他们给患者使用的某些疗法可能会对临床实验室检测产生下游影响,即出现检测干扰。对于那些依赖于基于抗体的方法,或者直接涉及该方法的实验室检测,这种情况尤其如此。静脉注射免疫球蛋白治疗就是这样一种治疗方法,它理论上可以直接影响病毒血清学领域的某些特定检测的结果。本研究可以为研究静脉注射免疫球蛋白治疗对阳性结果影响的临床医生提供参考,这些阳性结果与患者的临床背景不符。
我们描述了一个病例,其中静脉注射免疫球蛋白治疗导致一系列病毒血清学检测出现临床假阳性,与已知的患者病史以及最近的实验室结果不一致。患者因瘀点样出血性皮疹就诊,并在最初的血液检查显示血小板极低后被检查出血小板减少症。随后对潜在的低血小板原因进行了多项病毒血清学检测,包括肝炎、巨细胞病毒和人类免疫缺陷病毒。初步检测表明,除了乙型肝炎表面抗原抗体的免疫外,患者所有的病毒抗体和抗原均呈阴性。作为血小板减少症治疗的一部分,给予了静脉注射免疫球蛋白治疗,随后进行了病毒血清学检测。这些检测结果表明,患者的几种肝炎抗体和巨细胞病毒呈阳性。
本病例研究说明了静脉注射免疫球蛋白治疗可能导致患者先前或正在进行的感染状态诊断不当。在解释涉及巨细胞病毒和肝炎的结果时应格外小心。