Dried blood spots for Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae detection and serotyping among children < 5 years old in rural Mozambique.
Colonization
Dried blood spot
Haemophilus influenzae
Nasopharynx
Pneumonia
Streptococcus pneumoniae
Journal
BMC pediatrics
ISSN: 1471-2431
Titre abrégé: BMC Pediatr
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967804
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 07 2020
02 07 2020
Historique:
received:
20
03
2020
accepted:
16
06
2020
entrez:
4
7
2020
pubmed:
4
7
2020
medline:
15
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Dried blood spots (DBS) have been proposed as potentially tool for detecting invasive bacterial diseases. We evaluated the use of DBS for S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae detection among children in Mozambique. Blood for DBS and nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs were collected from children with pneumonia and healthy aged < 5 years. Bacterial detection and serotyping were performed by quantitative PCR (qPCR) (NP and DBS; lytA gene for pneumococcus and hpd for H. influenzae) and culture (NP). Combined detection rates were compared between children with pneumonia and healthy. Of 325 children enrolled, 205 had pneumonia and 120 were healthy. Pneumococci were detected in DBS from 20.5 and 64.2% of children with pneumonia and healthy, respectively; NP specimens were positive for pneumococcus in 80.0 and 80.8%, respectively. H. influenzae was detected in DBS from 22.9% of children with pneumonia and 59.2% of healthy; 81.4 and 81.5% of NP specimens were positive for H. influenzae, respectively. DBS detected pneumococcal and H. influenzae DNA in children with pneumonia and healthy. Healthy children were often DBS positive for both bacteria, suggesting that qPCR of DBS specimens does not differentiate disease from colonization and is therefore not a useful diagnostic tool for children.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Dried blood spots (DBS) have been proposed as potentially tool for detecting invasive bacterial diseases.
METHODS
We evaluated the use of DBS for S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae detection among children in Mozambique. Blood for DBS and nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs were collected from children with pneumonia and healthy aged < 5 years. Bacterial detection and serotyping were performed by quantitative PCR (qPCR) (NP and DBS; lytA gene for pneumococcus and hpd for H. influenzae) and culture (NP). Combined detection rates were compared between children with pneumonia and healthy.
RESULTS
Of 325 children enrolled, 205 had pneumonia and 120 were healthy. Pneumococci were detected in DBS from 20.5 and 64.2% of children with pneumonia and healthy, respectively; NP specimens were positive for pneumococcus in 80.0 and 80.8%, respectively. H. influenzae was detected in DBS from 22.9% of children with pneumonia and 59.2% of healthy; 81.4 and 81.5% of NP specimens were positive for H. influenzae, respectively.
CONCLUSION
DBS detected pneumococcal and H. influenzae DNA in children with pneumonia and healthy. Healthy children were often DBS positive for both bacteria, suggesting that qPCR of DBS specimens does not differentiate disease from colonization and is therefore not a useful diagnostic tool for children.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32615947
doi: 10.1186/s12887-020-02209-3
pii: 10.1186/s12887-020-02209-3
pmc: PMC7331148
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
326Références
J Clin Microbiol. 2007 Aug;45(8):2460-6
pubmed: 17537936
J Clin Virol. 2015 May;66:95-9
pubmed: 25866346
J Clin Microbiol. 2010 May;48(5):1611-8
pubmed: 20220175
BMC Res Notes. 2018 Sep 10;11(1):657
pubmed: 30201041
PLoS One. 2016 Mar 23;11(3):e0152253
pubmed: 27007889
Epidemiol Infect. 2017 Oct;145(13):2750-2758
pubmed: 28847317
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2018 Oct;37(10):1054-1060
pubmed: 30216295
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Feb;51(2):647-52
pubmed: 23224094
Pediatrics. 1998 May;101(5):813-6
pubmed: 9565407
J Clin Microbiol. 1998 Mar;36(3):669-73
pubmed: 9508293
Int J Med Microbiol. 2011 Apr;301(4):303-9
pubmed: 21276750
J Clin Virol. 2009 Dec;46 Suppl 4:S37-42
pubmed: 19781984
J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2016 Oct 25;130:231-243
pubmed: 27390013
Lancet Infect Dis. 2004 Dec;4(12):751-60
pubmed: 15567125
Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Jun 15;64(suppl_3):S347-S356
pubmed: 28575371
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2009 Feb;28(2):108-13
pubmed: 19131902
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2016 Feb;94(2):322-326
pubmed: 26711525
Bioanalysis. 2013 Sep;5(17):2187-208
pubmed: 23962253
PLoS One. 2018 Jun 26;13(6):e0199363
pubmed: 29944695
Emerg Infect Dis. 2011 Jun;17(6):1125-7
pubmed: 21749788
Int J Infect Dis. 2015 Jul;36:39-45
pubmed: 25980619
Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Mar 1;32(5):824-5
pubmed: 11229853
Lancet. 2019 Aug 31;394(10200):757-779
pubmed: 31257127
PLoS One. 2013 Oct 08;8(10):e76970
pubmed: 24116190
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2014 Feb;90(2):195-210
pubmed: 24366501
Vaccine. 2016 Nov 4;34(46):5604-5611
pubmed: 27692770
PLoS One. 2018 Jan 5;13(1):e0190687
pubmed: 29304066