Clinical burden of hepatitis E virus infection in a tertiary care center in Flanders, Belgium.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection is increasingly recognized as a cause of hepatitis in developed countries. A high HEV IgG seroprevalence in humans and pigs is reported as well as sporadic clinical cases of autochtonous HEV but there are currently no data available on the clinical burden of HEV in Belgium. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the current study was to evaluate the actual clinical burden of HEV infections in our tertiary care center in Flanders, Belgium. STUDY DESIGN: In the setting of Ghent University Hospital, patients were assessed for the presence of HEV IgG and IgM as well as HEV RNA if no other cause was found for one of the following clinical presentations: a) elevation of liver enzymes in post-liver transplant; b) suspicion of acute or toxic hepatitis; c) unexplainable elevation of liver enzymes; d) cirrhosis with acute-on-chronic exacerbation. RESULTS: In a period of 39 months (January 2011-April 2014) 71 patients were enrolled. HEV IgG was found positive in 13 (18,3%) patients; HEV IgM in 6 patients (8,5%) and HEV RNA in 4 (5,6%) patients. All HEV IgM/RNA positive patients were male, aged 41-63, and classified in the clinical groups a), b) or d). HEV IgG seroprevalence was slightly higher but not significantly different from the seroprevalence in the general population in this region in Belgium previously reported to be 14% (p-value 0.41) by our group. CONCLUSIONS: HEV should be considered as a cause of liver pathology especially in middle-aged men with elevation of liver enzymes.

Hepatitis E virus serology and PCR: does the methodology matter?

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) genotype 3 is an emerging pathogen in the developed world. As the clinical manifestations and routine laboratory parameters are often nonspecific, accurate diagnostic tests are crucial. In the current study, the performance of six serological assays and three PCR assays for the detection of HEV was evaluated. In the setting of the Ghent University Hospital, patients with clinically suspected HEV infection were tested for the presence of HEV IgM and IgG as well as HEV RNA. Serology was performed using six commercial HEV ELISA assays: Biorex, Wantai and Mikrogen IgM and IgG. HEV RNA was detected using one commercial assay (Altona RealStar®), and two optimized in-house real-time RT-PCR assays (according to Jothikumar et al., 2006 and Gyarmati et al., 2007). In addition, all three PCR assays were performed on 16 external quality control (EQC) samples. In a period of 39 months (January 2011-April 2014), 70 patients were enrolled. Using different ELISA assays, the prevalence of antibodies varied from 5.7% to 14.3% for HEV IgM and from 15.7% to 20.0% for IgG. All but two of the results of the PCR assays performed on clinical samples agreed. However, 10 out of 16 EQC samples results showed major discrepancies. We observed important differences in the performance of various serological and PCR assays. For this reason, results of both serological and molecular tests for HEV should be interpreted with caution.

Comparative analysis of cervical cytology and human papillomavirus genotyping by three different methods in a routine diagnostic setting.

Application of Bethesda guidelines on cervical cytology involves human papillomavirus (HPV) determinations on all ASC-US and ASC-H results. We compared HPV DNA results in view of the eventual development of a cervical intraepithelial neoplasia lesion determined either on cytology or histology. A total of 214 liquid-based cytology samples were analysed. Three different HPV DNA methods were applied: the Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV test, INNO-Lipa HPV Genotyping Extra and Full Spectrum PCR HPV Amplification and Detection/Genotyping System by Lab2Lab Diagnostic Service. A comparison of these three methods showed full concordance only for 49 samples (23%), and 27 (13%) of the samples were discordant in indicating the presence of the high-risk HPV type. Out of 214 patients, 88 were selected who presented with a cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or a VAIN lesion at follow-up cytology or histology. In this group, full concordance with HPV genotyping was present only in 19 (22%) follow-up samples. Nine (10%) follow-up samples showed discordant results for the presence of a high-risk genotype between the three genotyping methods tested either by negativity for high-risk HPV by one of the methods (n=6) or by failure to genotype HPV (n=2), or by a combination of both (n=1). Moreover, discordance for the detection of HPV16 or HPV18 was observed between the three HPV DNA genotyping methods used in 9 (10%) follow-up samples. In addition, the performance of genotyping methods on 20 external quality samples was assessed, showing discordant results for HPV16 and HPV18. Major differences were found in the genotyping results according to the HPV DNA method. Our findings highlight the importance of careful interpretation of data from studies using different HPV genotyping methods and underline the need for standardization by method validation in clinical laboratories, especially in the setting of primary HPV screening.

Epidemiology of respiratory viruses in bronchoalveolar lavage samples in a tertiary hospital.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of respiratory viruses in adults is largely underexplored, as most studies focus on children. Additionally, in severely ill or immunocompromised adults, where respiratory infections are mostly attributed to bacteria and fungi; respiratory viruses can lead to severe complications. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the epidemiology of respiratory viruses in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BAL) specimens from patients with lower respiratory tract disease. The study population consisted of different groups including immunocompetent patients (control patients), solid organ transplant recipients, patients with haematological malignancies and other immunocompromised adults. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 134 BAL fluid specimens collected during 2009-2011 were retrospectively assessed with the new commercial multiplex real-time PCR FTD Respiratory 21 Plus(®), targeting 18 different viruses and 2 atypical bacterial pathogens. RESULTS: Viral or atypical bacterial pathogens were detected in 29.1% of BAL fluid specimens. Coronaviruses were most prevalent (13.4%), followed by rhinoviruses (5.2%), RSV (4.5%) and bocaviruses (3.7%). Comparing the total number of viruses detected, a statistically significant difference was observed between the control group and patients with haematological malignancies (27.5% vs. 57.1%, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, our study highlights the high prevalence of respiratory viruses in BAL fluid specimens from adult patients with lower respiratory tract disease. The methods to be used should be sensitive and cover a wide range of potential pathogens. The specific patient population can also influence the detection rates of respiratory viruses.