Laboratory cross-contamination by Mycobacterium tuberculosis is known to be responsible for the misdiagnosis of tuberculosis, but its impact on other contexts has not been analyzed. We present the findings of a molecular epidemiology analysis in which the recent transmission events identified by a genotyping reference center were overestimated as a result of unnoticed laboratory cross-contamination in the original diagnostic laboratories.The phenomenon of misdiagnosing tuberculosis by laboratory cross-contamination when Mycobacterium tuberculosis is cultured has been widely reported (3, 4-8, 10, 11). The production of aerosolized particles after the processing of smearpositive specimens, cultures positive for M. tuberculosis, or positive control strains may be responsible for the inoculation of other specimens processed on the same day or of reagents used for the decontamination of specimens (5). False positivity is suspected (i) if M. tuberculosis is cultured from a sample processed together with a smear-positive specimen, (ii) if M. tuberculosis is cultured from only one of the cultures in the set (usually with a low yield of bacteria), and (iii) if the clinician is considering an alternative diagnosis, that is, a diagnosis other than tuberculosis (TB). Suspicion of false positivity is increased when two or more of these conditions are met. Finally, if molecular analysis is available, cross-contamination is confirmed when the strains cultured from both truly infected and contaminated specimens share the same genotypic pattern and no epidemiological links can be found between the cases. Several studies, some of which are based on molecular analysis, have estimated that the rate of laboratory cross-contamination for M. tuberculosis ranges from 0.1% to 3%, although massive contamination has caused up to 65% of false-positive cases (11).False-positive results for tuberculosis have been a matter of concern because of the clinical, therapeutic, and social impacts of the misdiagnosis of tuberculosis. The economic load associated with each misdiagnosed case of tuberculosis has been estimated to be $32,618 (9). However, another area on which false positivity has an impact but which has received little attention is the misidentification of recent transmission events by molecular epidemiology studies. Molecular epidemiology is based on the analysis of the genotypes of cultured M. tuberculosis isolates to identify cases infected by the same M. tuberculosis strain. These cases are defined as clustered and are considered to be caused by recent transmission events and to belong to the same transmission chain. If an analysis to determine the existence of potential false-positive cases is not performed before molecular analysis, as a quality control of microbiological procedures, there is a risk of misassigning clustered cases. This refined preanalysis is not usually performed because molecular epidemiology studies are generally run by laboratories which are different from those which culture M. tuberculosis from clinical spec...

BackgroundBacteremia is common in severe urinary infections, but its influence on the outcomes is not well established. The aim of this study was to assess the association of bacteremia with outcomes in elderly patients admitted to hospital with pyelonephritis or urinary sepsis.MethodsThis prospective muticenter observational study was conducted at 5 Spanish hospitals. All patients aged >65 years with pyelonephritis or urinary sepsis admitted to the departments of internal medicine and with urine and blood cultures obtained at admission to hospital were eligible. Transfer to ICU, length of hospital stay, hospital mortality and all cause 30-day mortality in bacteremic and non-bacteremic groups were compared. Risk factors for all cause 30-day mortality was also estimated.ResultsOf the 424 patients included in the study 181 (42.7%) had bacteremia. Neither transfer to ICU (4.4% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.400), nor length of hospital stay (9.7±4.6 days vs. 9.0±7.3 days, p = 0.252), nor hospital mortality (3.3% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.187), nor all cause 30-day mortality (9.4% vs. 13.2%, p = 0.223) were different between bacteremic and non-bacteremic groups. By multivariate analysis, risk factors for all cause 30-day mortality were age (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.00–1.10), McCabe index ≥2 (OR 10.47, 95% CI 2.96–37.04) and septic shock (OR 8.56, 95% CI 2.86–25.61); whereas, bacteremia was inversely associated with all cause 30-day mortality (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.15–0.71).ConclusionsIn this cohort, bacteremia was not associated with a worse prognosis in elderly patients with pyelonephritis or urinary sepsis.

Our study is the first to demonstrate a significantly higher rate of adenomas, advanced neoplasia, and hyperplastic polyps in CHC patients compared to the general population. On multivariate analysis, CHC infection was found to be an independent risk factor for colorectal adenoma, particularly advanced neoplasia. Larger prospective studies are needed to strengthen our findings which may have implications for colorectal cancer screening.

No abstract