Sniffing out safety: canine detection and identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection from armpit sweat.

Detection dogs were trained to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection based on armpit sweat odor. Sweat samples were collected using cotton pads under the armpits of negative and positive human patients, confirmed by qPCR, for periods of 15-30 min. Multiple hospitals and organizations throughout Belgium participated in this study. The sweat samples were stored at -20°C prior to being used for training purposes. Six dogs were trained under controlled atmosphere conditions for 2-3 months. After training, a 7-day validation period was conducted to assess the dogs' performances. The detection dogs exhibited an overall sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 98%, and an accuracy of 95%. After validation, training continued for 3 months, during which the dogs' performances remained the same. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis revealed a unique sweat scent associated with SARS-CoV-2 positive sweat samples. This scent consisted of a wide variety of volatiles, including breakdown compounds of antiviral fatty acids, skin proteins and neurotransmitters/hormones. An acceptability survey conducted in Belgium demonstrated an overall high acceptability and enthusiasm toward the use of detection dogs for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Compared to qPCR and previous canine studies, the detection dogs have good performances in detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans, using frozen sweat samples from the armpits. As a result, they can be used as an accurate pre-screening tool in various field settings alongside the PCR test.

From Delta to Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant: Switch to saliva sampling for higher detection rate.

Background: Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing on a nasopharyngeal swab is the current standard for SARS-CoV-2 virus detection. Since collection of this sample type is experienced uncomfortable by patients, saliva- and oropharyngeal swab collections should be considered as alternative specimens. Objectives: Evaluation of the relative performance of oropharyngeal swab, nasopharyngeal swab and saliva for the RT-PCR based SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant detection. Study design: Nasopharyngeal swab, oropharyngeal swab and saliva were collected from 246 adult patients who presented for SARS-CoV-2 testing at the screening centre in Ypres (Belgium). RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 detection was performed on all three sample types separately. Variant type was determined for each positive patient using whole genome sequencing or Allplex SARS-CoV-2 variants I and II Assay. Results and conclusions: Saliva is superior compared to nasopharyngeal swab for the detection of the Omicron variant. For the detection of the Delta variant, nasopharyngeal swab and saliva can be considered equivalent specimens. Oropharyngeal swab is the least sensitive sample type and shows little added value when collected in addition to a single nasopharyngeal swab.

Prevalence and clinical relevance of colonization with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the obstetric population.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Routine screening for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in pregnant women is common practice in many hospitals. However, little is known on its prevalence and clinical relevance in this population. In this prospective longitudinal study, we aimed to investigate the MRSA prevalence in our obstetric population, the rate of vertical transmission of MRSA and the potential clinical relevance of MRSA colonization for both mother and child. A possible correlation between GBS and MRSA colonization was also investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MRSA screening samples were collected at 35-37 weeks of gestation (from mother), at delivery and at discharge (from mother and newborn). All samples were analyzed by conventional microbiological methods and MRSA strains were subjected to spa-typing to investigate genetic similarity. The medical records of all positive mother-child pairs were analyzed to detect the occurrence of clinical infection in the postpartum period. RESULTS: 679 mother-child pairs were included between June 2014 and July 2016. Maternal MRSA positivity rate was 1.3% at 35-37 weeks (vaginal/anorectal), 3.1% at delivery (nose/throat) and 3.6% at discharge (nose/throat). MRSA positivity in neonates was 0.3% at delivery and increased to 3% at discharge (nose/umbilicus). Almost all MRSA positive children were born to MRSA positive mothers (OR 120.40, 95% CI: 38.42-377.32). Genetic similarity of the MRSA strains found in mother and child was illustrated for all but one case. 57.7% of the cases of MRSA colonization in our cohort were associated with livestock exposure. 31% of the MRSA positive mothers developed an infectious complication in the postpartum period. No neonatal infectious complications were observed. GBS positivity was not a predictive factor for MRSA colonization in our cohort. CONCLUSION: The rate of MRSA colonization (overall 4.3%) in our obstetric population is similar to that described in the literature and that of the general population admitted to our hospital in the same period. Maternal MRSA colonization appeared to be an important risk factor for neonatal colonization. Whereas mothers were at higher risk of developing infectious morbidity in the postpartum period, no neonatal infectious complications were observed. We observed no correlation between GBS and MRSA colonization.

Antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and nucleoprotein evaluated by four automated immunoassays and three ELISAs.

OBJECTIVES: The aim was to determine the antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and nucleoprotein using four automated immunoassays and three ELISAs for the detection of total Ig antibodies (Roche) or IgG (Abbott, Diasorin, Snibe, Euroimmun, Mikrogen) in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Sensitivity and dynamic trend to seropositivity were evaluated in 233 samples from 114 patients with moderate, severe or critical COVID-19 confirmed with PCR on nasopharyngeal swab. Specificity was evaluated in 113 samples collected before January 2020, including 24 samples from patients with non-SARS coronavirus infection. RESULTS: Sensitivity for all assays was 100% (95% confidence interval 83.7-100) 3 weeks after onset of symptoms. Specificity varied between 94.7% (88.7-97.8) and 100% (96.1-100). Calculated at the cut-offs that corresponded to a specificity of 95% and 97.5%, Roche had the highest sensitivity (85.0% (79.8-89.0) and 81.1% (76.6-85.7), p < 0.05 except vs. Abbott). Seroconversion occurred on average 2 days earlier for Roche total Ig anti-N and the three IgG anti-N assays (Abbott, Mikrogen, Euroimmun) than for the two IgG anti-S assays (Diasorin, Euroimmun) (≥50% seroconversion day 9-10 vs. day 11-12 and p < 0.05 for percent seropositive patients day 9-10 to 17-18). There was no significant difference in the IgG antibody time to seroconversion between critical and non-critical patients. DISCUSSION: Seroconversion occurred within 3 weeks after onset of symptoms with all assays and on average 2 days earlier for assays detecting IgG or total Ig anti-N than for IgG anti-S. The specificity of assays detecting anti-N was comparable to anti-S and excellent in a challenging control population.

Laboratory diagnosis of urinary tract infections: Towards a BILULU consensus guideline.

Urinary tract infections (UTI) are very common throughout life and account for the majority of the workload in the clinical microbiology laboratory. Clear instructions for the interpretation of urine cultures by the laboratory technicians are indispensable to obtain standardized, reliable, and clinically useful results. In literature, there is often a lack of evidence-based practice in processing urinary samples in the laboratory. In this consensus document, the BILULU Study Group presents a practical approach for the implementation of existing guidelines for the culture of urine in the microbiology laboratory and offers answers for issues where no clear solution is available in the guidelines.

Multicenter evaluation of the revised RIDA® QUICK test (N1402) for rapid detection of norovirus in a diagnostic laboratory setting.

The updated RIDA® QUICK (N1402) immunochromatographic assay (R-Biopharm) for detection of norovirus was evaluated during a prospective, multicenter study using 771 stool samples from patients with gastroenteritis. Compared to real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-rtPCR) as gold standard, the RIDA® QUICK had an overall sensitivity of 72.8% (91/125) and a specificity of 99.5% (640/643). Genotype analysis of the polymerase (ORF1) and capsid (ORF2) region of the genome indicated that the RIDA® QUICK assay could detect a broad range of genotypes including new variants (15 of 125 positive samples) which were detected by an in-house SYBR®Green RT-rtPCR, but not by the RIDA® GENE PCR PG1415 (R-Biopharm) and mostly not by the RIDA® GENE PCR PG1405 and the Xpert® Norovirus assay (Cepheid). The RIDA® QUICK can be used to reliably confirm norovirus in stool samples, but a negative result does not definitively exclude the presence of norovirus.

Extended-Spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producing Enterobacter aerogenes phenotypically misidentified as Klebsiella pneumoniae or K. terrigena.

BACKGROUND: Enterobacter aerogenes and Klebsiella pneumoniae are common isolates in clinical microbiology and important as producers of extended spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL). The discrimination between both species, which is routinely based on biochemical characteristics, is generally accepted to be straightforward. Here we report that genotypically unrelated strains of E. aerogenes can be misidentified as K. pneumoniae by routine laboratories using standard biochemical identification and using identification automates. RESULTS: Ten clinical isolates, identified as K. pneumoniae or K. terrigena with the routinely used biochemical tests and with API-20E, were identified as E. aerogenes by tDNA-PCR - an identification that was confirmed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing for five of these isolates. Misidentification also occurred when using the automated identification systems Vitek 2 and Phoenix, and was due to delayed positivity for ornithine decarboxylase and motility. Subculture and prolonged incubation resulted in positive results for ornithine decarboxylase and for motility. It could be shown by RAPD-analysis that the E. aerogenes strains belonged to different genotypes. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical E. aerogenes isolates can be easily misidentified as Klebsiella due to delayed positivity for ornithine decarboxylase and motility. The phenomenon may be widespread, since it was shown to occur among genotypically unrelated strains from different hospitals and different isolation dates. A useful clue for correct identification is the presence of an inducible beta-lactamase, which is highly unusual for K. pneumoniae. In several instances, the use of genotypic techniques like tDNA-PCR may circumvent problems of phenotypic identification.