BACKGROUND Serologic cross-reactivity between hantaviruses often complicates the interpretation of the results.AIM To analyze the diagnostic value of indirect immunofluorescence assay(IFA)and western blot(WB)in the di...BACKGROUND Serologic cross-reactivity between hantaviruses often complicates the interpretation of the results.AIM To analyze the diagnostic value of indirect immunofluorescence assay(IFA)and western blot(WB)in the diagnosis of hantavirus infections.METHODS One hundred eighty-eight serum samples from Puumala(PUUV)and Dobrava(DOBV)orthohantavirus infected patients were analyzed.Serology was performed using commercial tests(Euroimmun,Lübeck,Germany).RESULTS Using IFA,49.5%of acute-phase samples showed a monotypic response to PUUV,while 50.5% cross-reacted with other hantaviruses.The overall cross-reactivity was higher for immunoglobulin G(IgG)(50.0%)than for immunoglobulin M(IgM)(25.5%).PUUV IgM/IgG antibodies showed low/moderate reactivity with orthohantaviruses Hantaan(12.3%/31.5%),Seoul(7.5%/17.8%),DOBV(5.4%/28.1%),and Saaremaa(4.8%/15.7%).Both DOBV IgM and IgG antibodies were broadly reactive with Hantaan(76.2%/95.2%),Saaremaa(80.9%/83.3%),and Seoul(78.6%/85.7%)and moderate with PUUV(28.5%/38.1%).Using a WB,serotyping was successful in most cross-reactive samples(89.5%).CONCLUSION The presented results indicate that WB is more specific than IFA in the diagnosis of hantavirus infections,confirming serotype in most IFA cross-reactive samples.展开更多
Background: Diagnosis of autoimmune diseases (AID) is challenging, due to overlapping features with other non-immune disorders. Anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA) are sensitive screening tests but anti-deoxyribonucleic aci...Background: Diagnosis of autoimmune diseases (AID) is challenging, due to overlapping features with other non-immune disorders. Anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA) are sensitive screening tests but anti-deoxyribonucleic acid-antibody (anti-DNA), and anti-extractable nuclear antigens (anti-ENA) are specific for AIDs. We aimed to look at ANA patterns in our patients and correlated them with anti-ENA for proper interpretation and better patient management cost-effectively. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted over 1 year from January to December 2022 who were tested for ANA at biology medical laboratory of Pasteur Institute of Dakar. Anti-ENA and anti-DNA results were also analyzed for ANA-positive patients. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 14.0, p Results: 216 patients were analyzed. Women predominated at 79.2% and mean age was 48 years [CI 95%, 46 - 50], with extremes of 10 and 89. Most represented age group was [41 - 60] with 38%. ANA was positive in 27 (12.5%) of patients, 59.2% of whom were strongly positive (titer of 1/1000, 1/3200 or 1/6400). The most common pattern was nuclear speckled, which was found in 77.8% of samples. Anti-ENA and anti-DNA positivity in ANA-positive patients was found respectively in 63% (17/27) and 1.4% (3/27) of the samples analyzed. Most commonly identified anti-ENA was anti-Sm 29.6%, anti-SSA 29.6%, anti-Ro-52 25.9%, anti-RNP 18.5% and anti-SSB 14.8% which was associated with speckled pattern. Association results indicated a significant relationship between both tests and between ANA titer in the anti-ENA- and ANA-positive patients (p 0.001). Conclusions: ANA, Anti-ENA and anti-DNA antibodies are essential for AIDS diagnosis. However, the testing repertoire should follow an algorithm comprising of clinical features, followed by ANA results with nuclear, mitotic, and cytoplasmic patterns, anti-ENA, and anti-DNA for a more meaningful, and cost-effective diagnostic approach.展开更多
文摘BACKGROUND Serologic cross-reactivity between hantaviruses often complicates the interpretation of the results.AIM To analyze the diagnostic value of indirect immunofluorescence assay(IFA)and western blot(WB)in the diagnosis of hantavirus infections.METHODS One hundred eighty-eight serum samples from Puumala(PUUV)and Dobrava(DOBV)orthohantavirus infected patients were analyzed.Serology was performed using commercial tests(Euroimmun,Lübeck,Germany).RESULTS Using IFA,49.5%of acute-phase samples showed a monotypic response to PUUV,while 50.5% cross-reacted with other hantaviruses.The overall cross-reactivity was higher for immunoglobulin G(IgG)(50.0%)than for immunoglobulin M(IgM)(25.5%).PUUV IgM/IgG antibodies showed low/moderate reactivity with orthohantaviruses Hantaan(12.3%/31.5%),Seoul(7.5%/17.8%),DOBV(5.4%/28.1%),and Saaremaa(4.8%/15.7%).Both DOBV IgM and IgG antibodies were broadly reactive with Hantaan(76.2%/95.2%),Saaremaa(80.9%/83.3%),and Seoul(78.6%/85.7%)and moderate with PUUV(28.5%/38.1%).Using a WB,serotyping was successful in most cross-reactive samples(89.5%).CONCLUSION The presented results indicate that WB is more specific than IFA in the diagnosis of hantavirus infections,confirming serotype in most IFA cross-reactive samples.
文摘Background: Diagnosis of autoimmune diseases (AID) is challenging, due to overlapping features with other non-immune disorders. Anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA) are sensitive screening tests but anti-deoxyribonucleic acid-antibody (anti-DNA), and anti-extractable nuclear antigens (anti-ENA) are specific for AIDs. We aimed to look at ANA patterns in our patients and correlated them with anti-ENA for proper interpretation and better patient management cost-effectively. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted over 1 year from January to December 2022 who were tested for ANA at biology medical laboratory of Pasteur Institute of Dakar. Anti-ENA and anti-DNA results were also analyzed for ANA-positive patients. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 14.0, p Results: 216 patients were analyzed. Women predominated at 79.2% and mean age was 48 years [CI 95%, 46 - 50], with extremes of 10 and 89. Most represented age group was [41 - 60] with 38%. ANA was positive in 27 (12.5%) of patients, 59.2% of whom were strongly positive (titer of 1/1000, 1/3200 or 1/6400). The most common pattern was nuclear speckled, which was found in 77.8% of samples. Anti-ENA and anti-DNA positivity in ANA-positive patients was found respectively in 63% (17/27) and 1.4% (3/27) of the samples analyzed. Most commonly identified anti-ENA was anti-Sm 29.6%, anti-SSA 29.6%, anti-Ro-52 25.9%, anti-RNP 18.5% and anti-SSB 14.8% which was associated with speckled pattern. Association results indicated a significant relationship between both tests and between ANA titer in the anti-ENA- and ANA-positive patients (p 0.001). Conclusions: ANA, Anti-ENA and anti-DNA antibodies are essential for AIDS diagnosis. However, the testing repertoire should follow an algorithm comprising of clinical features, followed by ANA results with nuclear, mitotic, and cytoplasmic patterns, anti-ENA, and anti-DNA for a more meaningful, and cost-effective diagnostic approach.
