Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Med Mycol ; 60(10)2022 Oct 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36149324

RESUMO

Cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) is a capsule polysaccharide antigen that can be detected in the fluids of patients with cryptococcal infections. Cryptococcal Antigen Latex Agglutination System (CALAS), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (EIA), and lateral flow assay (LFA) are the main methods available. Two main commercial LFA kits are available: CryptoPS (Biosynex, Illkirch Graffenstaden, France) and CrAg LFA (IMMY, Inc. USA). In our lab, we prospectively used CryptoPS as a screening tool in serum for confirmed positive results with CALAS. We investigated the rigor of the CryptoPS test in serum in a multicentric evaluation over 3 years. To improve the specificity of CryptoPS in serum, we additionally implemented and evaluated a pretreatment protocol before CryptoPS testing. A total of 43 serum samples collected from 43 patients were investigated. We found that the CryptoPS assay is hampered by a high rate of false-positive results in serum with a high rate of CryptoPS-positive but CrAg LFA-negative and CALAS-negative sera in patients with no proof of Cryptococcus infection (n = 29). Using a simple pretreatment procedure (5 min incubation at 100°C and centrifugation) we were able to reverse false-positive results, suggesting that there could be interferent material present in the serum. Pretreatment also impacted the CryptoPS results (negative result) in two patients with the cryptococcal disease, one with isolated antigenemia and one with cryptococcal meningitis. Comparing the titers obtained with CALAS and CrAg LFA, we noticed that the titer obtained with CrAg LFA was almost 10-fold higher than those with CALAS. This study showed that Biosynex CryptoPS in serum could give false-positive results even in the absence of cryptococcal disease. These could be reduced by applying an easy pretreatment procedure to the serum before testing, with little but existing impact on the sensitivity.


Lateral flow assays are useful to detect the cryptococcal antigen in human fluids. We investigated CryptoPS-positive results and observed that true false-positive results occurred. The false-positive results can be reduced by applying an easy pretreatment procedure.


Assuntos
Criptococose , Cryptococcus , Infecções por HIV , Meningite Criptocócica , Animais , Antígenos de Fungos , Criptococose/diagnóstico , Criptococose/veterinária , Infecções por HIV/veterinária , Meningite Criptocócica/diagnóstico , Meningite Criptocócica/veterinária , Soro
2.
Diabetes Care ; 44(11): 2480-2486, 2021 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34475028

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Bone biopsy (BB) performed by a surgeon or an interventional radiologist is recommended for suspicion of osteomyelitis underlying diabetic foot ulcer (DFU). To facilitate its practice, we developed a procedure allowing bedside blind bone biopsy (B4) by a diabetologist. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a three-step observational study consisting of a feasibility and safety phase (phase 1) to assess the success and side effects of B4, a validity phase (phase 2) to compare DFU outcomes between positive (B4+) and negative (B4-) bone cultures, and a performance phase (phase 3) to compare B4 with the conventional surgical or radiological procedure basic bone biopsy (B3). Primary end points were the presence of bone tissue (phase 1) and complete DFU healing with exclusive medical treatment at 12 months (phases 2 and 3). RESULTS: In phase 1, 37 consecutive patients with clinical and/or radiological suspicion of DFU osteomyelitis underwent B4. Bone tissue was collected in all patients with few side effects. In phase 2, a B4+ bone culture was found in 40 of 79 (50.6%) participants. Among B4+ patients, complete wound healing after treatment was 57.5%. No statistical difference was observed with patients with B4- bone culture not treated with antibiotics (71.8%, P = 0.18). In phase 3, the proportion of patients with positive BB was lower in B4 (40 of 79, 50.6%) than in B3 (34 of 44, 77.3%, P < 0.01). However, complete healing was similar (64.6% vs. 54.6%, P = 0.28). No difference in rate of culture contamination was observed. CONCLUSIONS: B4 is a simple, safe, and efficient procedure for the diagnosis of DFU osteomyelitis with a similar proportion of healing to conventional BB.


Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus , Pé Diabético , Osteomielite , Biópsia/métodos , Osso e Ossos/patologia , Pé Diabético/diagnóstico , Humanos , Osteomielite/diagnóstico , Osteomielite/tratamento farmacológico , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA