Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Evaluation of the Genmark ePlex® and QIAstat-Dx® respiratory pathogen panels in detecting bacterial targets in lower respiratory tract specimens.
van Asten, Suzanne A V; Boers, Stefan A; de Groot, Jolanda D F; Schuurman, R; Claas, Eric C J.
Afiliação
  • van Asten SAV; Department of Medical Microbiology, Leiden University Medical Center, PO Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands. s.a.v.van_asten@lumc.nl.
  • Boers SA; Department of Medical Microbiology, Leiden University Medical Center, PO Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands.
  • de Groot JDF; Department of Medical Microbiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Schuurman R; Department of Medical Microbiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Claas ECJ; Department of Medical Microbiology, Leiden University Medical Center, PO Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands.
BMC Microbiol ; 21(1): 236, 2021 08 26.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34445973
BACKGROUND: The ePlex® and QIAstat-Dx® respiratory pathogen panels detect multiple respiratory pathogens, mainly viruses but also Legionella pneumophila, Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Bordetella pertussis. The assays have been marketed for use in nasopharyngeal swab specimens. For diagnosing bacterial pneumonia, lower respiratory tract (LRT) specimens are indicated. Aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of these syndromic panels for these three bacterial targets in samples from the LRT. Fifty-six specimens were collected from our repositories, five negative samples and fifty-one samples which had been previously tested positive with the routine diagnostic real-time PCR assays for Legionella spp. (N = 20), Bordetella spp. (N = 16) or M. pneumoniae (N = 15). RESULTS: The QIAstat-Dx Respiratory Panel V2 (RP) assay detected all of the L. pneumophila and B. pertussis positive samples but only 11/15 (73.3 %) of the M. pneumoniae targets. The ePlex Respiratory Pathogen Panel (RPP) assay detected 10/14 (71.4 %) of the L. pneumophila targets, 8/12 (66.7 %) of the B. pertussis positive samples and 13/15 (86.7 %) of the M. pneumoniae targets. CONCLUSIONS: No false-positive results were reported for all three bacterial pathogens by both assays. The clinical performance of both assays depended highly on the bacterial load in the sample and the type of specimen under investigation.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Kit de Reagentes para Diagnóstico / Infecções Respiratórias / Bactérias / Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Evaluation_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: BMC Microbiol Assunto da revista: MICROBIOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Holanda

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Kit de Reagentes para Diagnóstico / Infecções Respiratórias / Bactérias / Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Evaluation_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: BMC Microbiol Assunto da revista: MICROBIOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Holanda