4.7 Article

Diagnosis of enteroviral meningitis by use of polymerase chain reaction of cerebrospinal fluid, stool, and serum specimens

期刊

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 40, 期 7, 页码 982-987

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1086/428581

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Because enteroviruses can be detected in various clinical samples during enteroviral meningitis, we analyzed the combined diagnostic utility of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), feces, and serum for detection of enterovirus in specimens obtained from adults with aseptic meningitis or encephalitis. Methods. PCR results were analyzed for 34 adults for whom enteroviral meningitis was diagnosed on the basis of virus isolation and antibody detection in our hospital during 1999-2003. PCR results were also analyzed for 77 adults with meningitis or encephalitis of another defined cause for whom this assay was used for diagnostic evaluation during that period. Results. Twenty-six (76%) of 34 CSF samples and 24 (96%) of 25 fecal samples collected from patients with enteroviral meningitis had positive PCR results. The diagnostic yield of the test was lower for CSF specimens obtained 12 days after clinical onset, compared with CSF collected less than or equal to2 days after onset. Instead, PCR of feces was highly useful also later, because 12 of the 13 fecal specimens obtained 5-16 days after clinical onset had positive test results. None of 75 CSF samples and 2 of 48 fecal samples obtained from patients with nonenteroviral infection had positive PCR results. All serum samples were PCR negative. Conclusions. PCR of fecal specimens obtained throughout the course of enteroviral meningitis had the highest clinical sensitivity for detecting enterovirus. It is recommended that, in addition to performance of CSF PCR, fecal samples collected from patients with suspected enteroviral meningitis should be tested by PCR, especially when the duration of symptoms is 12 days.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据