Kasule Sabirah, Fernholz Emily, Grant Leah, Kole Amy, Grys Thomas E, Kaleta Erin, Theel Elitza S, Pritt Bobbi, Graf Erin H
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.
Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Internal Medicine, BronxCare Health System, Bronx, New York, USA.
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2024 Apr 24;11(5):ofae188. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofae188. eCollection 2024 May.
In 2021, the state of Arizona experienced the largest focal outbreak of West Nile virus (WNV) in US history. Timely and accurate diagnostic testing remains a challenge for WNV due to transient viremia and limited immunoassay specificity. Recent studies have identified whole blood (WB) and urine as more sensitive specimen types for the detection of WNV RNA.
We evaluated ordering practices, test performance, and patient characteristics of probable and confirmed cases. In total, we identified 190 probable and proven cases, including 127 patients (66.8%) with neuroinvasive disease.
Among all cases, only 29.5% had WNV polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing ordered on WB, of which 80.3% resulted as positive, including 7 cases in which WNV serologic testing was negative and 5 cases for which serologic testing was not ordered. In comparison, only 23.7% of cases that had cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) PCR ordered had a positive result, including 3 cases that were negative by PCR on WB. In contrast, WNV PCR on WB detected 12 neuroinvasive cases that were CSF PCR negative. WNV PCR testing in urine was only ordered on 2 patients, both of whom were positive. Crossing cycle threshold (Ct) values were not significantly different between WB and CSF specimen types, nor was there a correlation between Ct value and days from symptom onset at the time of sample collection; all specimen types and time points had Ct values, with 98% above 30. WB was positive by WNV PCR in several patients for >7 days (range, 7-25 days) after symptom onset, as was the CSF PCR.
Taken together, these findings indicate that WNV PCR testing on WB may be the best initial test for timely diagnosis of WNV infection, irrespective of clinical manifestation; however, if negative in patients with suspected neuroinvasive disease, WNV PCR testing on CSF should be ordered.
2021年,亚利桑那州经历了美国历史上最大规模的西尼罗河病毒(WNV)局部暴发。由于病毒血症短暂且免疫测定特异性有限,及时准确的诊断检测对WNV来说仍是一项挑战。最近的研究已确定全血(WB)和尿液是检测WNV RNA更敏感的标本类型。
我们评估了疑似和确诊病例的检测申请情况、检测性能及患者特征。我们总共确定了190例疑似和确诊病例,其中127例(66.8%)患有神经侵袭性疾病。
在所有病例中,仅29.5%的病例申请了对WB进行WNV聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测,其中80.3%结果为阳性,包括7例WNV血清学检测为阴性的病例以及5例未申请血清学检测的病例。相比之下,申请脑脊液(CSF)PCR检测的病例中只有23.7%结果为阳性,包括3例WB PCR检测为阴性的病例。相反,WB上的WNV PCR检测出12例CSF PCR检测为阴性的神经侵袭性病例。仅对2例患者的尿液进行了WNV PCR检测,两人结果均为阳性。WB和CSF标本类型之间的交叉循环阈值(Ct)值无显著差异,Ct值与样本采集时症状出现后的天数之间也无相关性;所有标本类型和时间点均有Ct值,98%高于30。症状出现后,数名患者的WB经WNV PCR检测呈阳性超过7天(范围为7 - 25天),CSF PCR检测也是如此。
总体而言,这些发现表明,无论临床表现如何,对WB进行WNV PCR检测可能是及时诊断WNV感染的最佳初始检测方法;然而,对于疑似神经侵袭性疾病的患者,如果WB检测结果为阴性,则应申请对CSF进行WNV PCR检测。