Jeffery K J, Read S J, Peto T E, Mayon-White R T, Bangham C R
Public Health Laboratory Service Department of Microbiology, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK.
Lancet. 1997 Feb 1;349(9048):313-7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)08107-X.
Standard laboratory techniques, such as viral culture and serology, provide only circumstantial or retrospective evidence of viral infections of the central nervous system (CNS). We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of PCR of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in the diagnosis of viral infections of the CNS.
We examined all the CSF samples that were received at our diagnostic virology laboratory between May, 1994, and May, 1996, by nested PCR for viruses associated with CNS infections in the UK. We collected clinical and laboratory data for 410 patients from Oxford city hospitals (the Oxford cohort) whose CSF was examined between May, 1994, and May, 1995. These patients were classified according to the likelihood of a viral infection of the CNS. We used stratified logistic regression analysis to identify the clinical factors independently associated with a positive PCR result. We calculated likelihood ratios to estimate the clinical usefulness of PCR amplification of CSF.
We tested 2233 consecutive CSF samples from 2162 patients. A positive PCR result was obtained in 143 patients, including 22 from the Oxford cohort. Logistic regression analysis of the Oxford cohort showed that fever, a virus-specific rash, and a CSF white-cell count of 5/microL or more were independent predictors of a positive PCR result. The likelihood ratio for a definite diagnosis of viral infection of the CNS in a patient with a positive PCR result, relative to a negative PCR result, was 88.2 (95% CI 20.6-378). The likelihood ratio for a possible diagnosis of viral infection of the CNS in a patient with a negative PCR result, relative to a positive PCR result, was 0.10 (0.03-0.39).
A patient with a positive PCR result was 88 times as likely to have a definite diagnosis of viral infection of the CNS as a patient with a negative PCR result. A negative PCR result can be used with moderate confidence to rule out a diagnosis of viral infection of the CNS. We believe that PCR will become the first-line diagnostic test for viral meningitis and encephalitis.
标准实验室技术,如病毒培养和血清学检查,仅能提供中枢神经系统(CNS)病毒感染的间接或回顾性证据。我们评估了脑脊液(CSF)聚合酶链反应(PCR)在诊断CNS病毒感染中的诊断准确性。
我们对1994年5月至1996年5月期间在我们诊断病毒学实验室收到的所有CSF样本进行检测,采用巢式PCR检测与英国CNS感染相关的病毒。我们收集了1994年5月至1995年5月期间在牛津市医院接受CSF检查的410例患者(牛津队列)的临床和实验室数据。这些患者根据CNS病毒感染的可能性进行分类。我们使用分层逻辑回归分析来确定与PCR阳性结果独立相关的临床因素。我们计算似然比以评估CSF PCR扩增结果的临床实用性。
我们检测了来自2162例患者的2233份连续CSF样本。143例患者PCR结果呈阳性,其中22例来自牛津队列。对牛津队列的逻辑回归分析表明,发热、病毒特异性皮疹以及CSF白细胞计数为5/μL或更高是PCR阳性结果的独立预测因素。PCR结果阳性的患者确诊CNS病毒感染的似然比相对于PCR结果阴性的患者为88.2(95%可信区间20.6 - 378)。PCR结果阴性的患者可能诊断为CNS病毒感染的似然比相对于PCR结果阳性的患者为0.10(0.03 - 0.39)。
PCR结果阳性的患者确诊CNS病毒感染的可能性是PCR结果阴性患者的88倍。PCR结果阴性可在一定程度上可靠地用于排除CNS病毒感染的诊断。我们认为PCR将成为病毒性脑膜炎和脑炎的一线诊断检测方法。