Laboratory-based assessment of influenza in German ambulant patients from 1998 to 2008

Terletskaia-Ladwig, Elena; Eggers, Maren; Meier, Simone Martina; Leinmüller, M.; Schneider, François; Schmid, Matthias; Enders, Martin

doi:10.1007/s15010-009-8434-7

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…About 1 in 3 patients with ARI had laboratory-confirmed influenza. This prevalence, which is similar to or higher than, estimates of influenza infection incidence in the United States (Brammer et al, 2002), other western countries (Terletskaia-Ladwig et al, 2009), and Asia (Simmerman et al, 2008) reaffirms influenza virus infection is a prominent cause of ARI in Côte d'Ivoire. Surprisingly, seasonal influenza strains predominated in this region during a time when 2009 pandemic A(H1N1) was widespread in other parts of the world.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Comparing influenza positivity rates by Real-Time RT-PCR, Elisa and viral culture methods in Côte d’Ivoire, West Africa, in 2009

Nzussouo¹,

Kadjo²,

Coulibaly³

et al. 2013

African Journal of Infectious Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Detection of circulating influenza strains is a key public health concern especially in limited-resource settings where diagnosis capabilities remain a challenge. As part of multi-site surveillance in Côte d'Ivoire during the 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic, we had the opportunity to test respiratory specimens collected from patients with acute respiratory illness (ARI). We analyzed and compared the percentage of specimens testing positive using three laboratory methods (rtRT-PCR, ELISA, viral culture). From January to October 2009, 1,356 respiratory specimens were collected from patients with acute respiratory illness and shipped at the WHO NIC (Institut Pasteur) Cote d'Ivoire, and 453 (33%) tested positive for influenza by one or more laboratory methods. The proportion of positive influenza tests did not differ by the sex or age of the patient or presenting symptoms, but did differ depending on the timing and site of specimen collection. Of the 453 positive specimens, 424 (93.6%) were detected by PCR, 199 (43.9%) by ELISA and 40 (8.8%) by viral culture. While seasonal influenza A(H1N1) virus strains were prominent, only four 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) cases were detected. Use of molecular biology method (rtRT-PCR) increased sensitivity and diagnosis capabilities. Among all three methods used, rRT-PCR was the most sensitive and rapid method. More capacity building is still required for viral culture. Need to collect denominator data in order to have an accurate estimate of the burden of influenza. There was delayed introduction of pandemic influenza A(H1N1)2009 in Cote d'Ivoire

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Comparing influenza positivity rates by Real-Time RT-PCR, Elisa and viral culture methods in Côte d’Ivoire, West Africa, in 2009

Nzussouo¹,

Kadjo²,

Coulibaly³

et al. 2013

African Journal of Infectious Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this study, clinical samples of children were overrepresented (Fig. 1), because children aged <5 years have more influenza-related medical care visits compared with older children, and, particularly, those aged <2 years are at the greatest risk for influenza-related hospitalizations [6, 14]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The rapid culture technique was performed as described previously [14]. MDCK cells were seeded in 96-well microtiter plates in antibiotic-free EMEM containing 10% FBS and incubated at 37°C for 1–3 days before testing.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the novel ResPlex III assay and existing techniques for the detection and subtyping of influenza virus during the influenza season 2006–2007

Eggers¹,

Roth

Schweiger

et al. 2011

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Influenza virus is a major cause of disease worldwide. The accurate detection and further subtyping of influenza A viruses are important for epidemiologic surveillance, and subsequent comprehensive characterization of circulating influenza viruses is essential for the selection of an optimal vaccine composition. ResPlex III is a new multiplex reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-based method for detecting, typing, and subtyping influenza virus in clinical specimens. The ResPlex III assay was compared with other methods with respect to sensitivity and accuracy, using 450 clinical specimens obtained from subjects throughout Germany during the 2006–2007 influenza season. Samples were analyzed for the presence of influenza virus in Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cells by rapid cell culture using peroxidase staining and conventional cell culture confirmed by hemagglutination inhibition assay, a rapid diagnostic assay (Directigen Flu A+B test; BD Diagnostic Systems, Heidelberg, Germany), in-house real-time RT-PCR (RRT-PCR), and ResPlex III (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). ResPlex III had the highest sensitivity for detecting influenza virus in clinical specimens, followed by in-house RRT-PCR (96% compared with ResPlex III). Conventional cell culture in MDCK cells, rapid culture, and quick test assays were substantially less sensitive (55%, 72%, and 39%, respectively). Virus subtyping results were identical using ResPlex III and the standard virological subtyping method, hemagglutination inhibition. ResPlex III is a quick, accurate, and sensitive assay for detecting and typing influenza A and B viruses and subtyping influenza A viruses in clinical specimens, and might be considered for a supplemental role in worldwide seasonal and pandemic influenza surveillance.

show abstract

“…Further characterization was performed after isolation of the virus in cell culture. During the 2003–2004 to 2007–2008 seasons, the virus was isolated using Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cells by conventional cell culture, rapid cell culture and MDCK 33016PF suspension culture, which have been described previously [ 10 , 11 ]. During the 2008–2009 and 2010–2011 seasons, PCR-positive samples were inoculated onto 24-well tissue culture plates with MDCK and HepG2 cells (liver hepatocellular cells).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the Becton Dickinson Rapid Influenza Diagnostic Tests in Outpatients in Germany during Seven Influenza Seasons

Eggers¹,

Enders²,

Terletskaia-Ladwig³

2015

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAn extensive retrospective study spanning several seasons was undertaken to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the BD rapid influenza diagnostic test (RIDT) in comparison with the RT-PCR assay.MethodsA total of 2,179 respiratory samples were tested in parallel by in-house RT-PCR and the RIDT. During the 2003-2004, 2006-2007, 2007-2008, and 2008-2009 (n=1671) seasons, the BD Directigen Flu A+B test was used, and during the 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 (n=508) seasons, the BD Directigen EZ Flu A+B test b was used.ResultsThe sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for the BD Directigen Flu A+B test calculated for types A and B together were 39%, 99%, 98%, and 56%, respectively. For the BD Directigen EZ Flu A+B test, these values were 47%, 100%, 100%, 55%, respectively. The sensitivity of the BD Directigen Flu A+B test did not differ significantly from season to season or between types A (44%) and B (37%). The sensitivity of the BD Directigen EZ Flu A+B test calculated for type A only was 59%, which was considerably higher than the sensitivity of this test for type B (23%). The sensitivity of the RIDT was approximately 40-50% in children and teenagers, but it was only 18.% in adults aged 20 years and older. The specificity of both RIDTs was very high (>99%) during all seasons.ConclusionsDue to their rapid turnaround time, RIDTs can help guide decisions about the clinical management of influenza. Because of the high specificity, a positive result can be interpreted as a true positive, and antiviral therapy as well as appropriate measures to prevent the transmission of influenza can be initiated. The best sensitivity of the RIDT is achieved in children. However, even in this group, the RIDT will only recognize influenza infection in approximately half of the cases, and influenza should still be considered in patients with negative results; negative RIDT results must be confirmed by PCR.

show abstract

Laboratory-based assessment of influenza in German ambulant patients from 1998 to 2008

Cited by 4 publications

References 22 publications

Comparing influenza positivity rates by Real-Time RT-PCR, Elisa and viral culture methods in Côte d’Ivoire, West Africa, in 2009

Comparing influenza positivity rates by Real-Time RT-PCR, Elisa and viral culture methods in Côte d’Ivoire, West Africa, in 2009

Comparison of the novel ResPlex III assay and existing techniques for the detection and subtyping of influenza virus during the influenza season 2006–2007

Evaluation of the Becton Dickinson Rapid Influenza Diagnostic Tests in Outpatients in Germany during Seven Influenza Seasons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About