Upper respiratory tract infection (URI) is a nonspecific term used to describe acute infections involving the nose, paranasal sinuses, pharynx, and larynx above the vocal cords. The aim of this study was to provide a summary of the most common pathogens of URI and to compare advantages and disadvantages of traditional and new rapid microbiological tests used to identify them. Blood samples were simultaneously examined by the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and by the FilmArray Respiratory Panel for eight different pathogens in a total of 15 tests performed in nasopharyngeal swabs. The ELISA method is unable to identify the pathologic agent until the host's immune system elicits a response. The method is readily available in many laboratories at a low cost, which puts less strain on economic resources. The FilmArray Panel, on the other hand, is more expensive, but it is fast and exact in the identification of a broad spectrum etiologic agents. Nonetheless, since most repiratory tract infections are viral in origin and there is no treatment available, the diagnosis provided by the FilmArray Panel does not provide any additional clinical benefit and thus should be used only whenever necessary on the individual basis.
Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization - time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry enables to identify microorganisms by comparison of the protein content with reference spectra in the database. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of phenotypic identification of mycobacteria by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry in laboratory practice. Seventy five isolates of mycobacteria were identified by molecular and phenotypic method, and the results were compared by MALDI-TOF. For MALDI-TOF, material was processed according to the Bruker Daltonics protocol and Mycobacterial Library database version 2.0, with 313 reference mycobacteria spectra. All except one of the 72 isolates agreed with regard to the species and genus by both methods. Forty three isolates were identified as the M. tuberculosis complex by MALDI-TOF. Thirty one isolates of nontuberculous mycobacteria were consistently identified by both methods to the species level. We conclude that MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry is an accurate method of bacterial identification. Simplicity, speed, and economic availability of the method makes it suitable for mycobacteria identification in a routine laboratory.
The global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is having a tremendous impact on the global economy, health care systems and the lives of almost all people in the world. The Central European country of Slovakia reached one of the highest daily mortality rates per 100,000 inhabitants in the first 3 months of 2021, despite implementing strong prophylactic measures, lockdowns and repeated nationwide antigen testing. The present study reports a comparison of the performance of the Standard Q COVID-19 antigen test (SD Biosensor) with three commercial RT-qPCR kits (vDetect COVID-19-MultiplexDX, gb SARS-CoV-2 Multiplex-GENERI BIOTECH Ltd. and Genvinset COVID-19 [E]-BDR Diagnostics) in the detection of infected individuals among employees of the Martin University Hospital in Slovakia. Health care providers, such as doctors and nurses, are classified as “critical infrastructure”, and there is no doubt about the huge impact that incorrect results could have on patients. Out of 1231 samples, 14 were evaluated as positive for SARS-CoV-2 antigen presence, and all of them were confirmed by RT-qPCR kit 1 and kit 2. As another 26 samples had a signal in the E gene, these 40 samples were re-isolated and subsequently re-analysed using the three kits, which detected the virus in 22, 23 and 12 cases, respectively. The results point to a divergence not only between antigen and RT-qPCR tests, but also within the “gold standard” RT-qPCR testing. Performance analysis of the diagnostic antigen test showed the positive predictive value (PPV) to be 100% and negative predictive value (NPV) to be 98.10%, indicating that 1.90% of individuals with a negative result were, in fact, positive. If these data are extrapolated to the national level, where the mean daily number of antigen tests was 250,000 in April 2021, it points to over 4700 people per day being misinterpreted and posing a risk of virus shedding. While mean Ct values of the samples that were both antigen and RT-qPCR positive were about 20 (kit 1: 20.47 and 20.16 for Sarbeco E and RdRP, kit 2: 19.37 and 19.99 for Sarbeco E and RdRP and kit 3: 17.47 for ORF1b/RdRP), mean Ct values of the samples that were antigen-negative but RT-qPCR-positive were about 30 (kit 1: 30.67 and 30.00 for Sarbeco E and RdRP, kit 2: 29.86 and 31.01 for Sarbeco E and RdRP and kit 3: 27.47 for ORF1b/RdRP). It confirms the advantage of antigen test in detecting the most infectious individuals with a higher viral load. However, the reporting of Ct values is still a matter of ongoing debates and should not be conducted without normalisation to standardised controls of known concentration.
SummaryDirofilariosis is a vector-borne disease that is spreading in Europe from the southern endemic regions to the northern countries, including Slovakia. The dog parasites Dirofilaria immitis and D. repens are zoonotic agents, responsible for the development of human pulmonary and subcutaneous dirofilariosis, respectively. The present paper reports the third case of human dirofilariosis in Slovakia caused by D. repens. The pacient, a 41-year-old woman, was referred with tumour process in the subcutaneous area of the right forearm. Within 14 days the USG confirmed the rapid increase of the nodule from 20 x 10 mm to 30 x 25 mm. The surgical extirpation of the tumour was indicated. Histological examination revealed the formation with eosinofilic rime and the presence of a worm in the centre, detected as D. repens.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.