Evaluation of a WHO-Validated Serotype-Specific Serological Assay for the Diagnosis of Pneumococcal Etiology in Children with Community-Acquired Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: The etiologic diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains challenging in children because blood cultures have low sensitivity. Novel approaches are needed to confirm the role of Streptococcus pneumoniae. METHODS: In this study, pneumococcal aetiology was determined by serology using a subset of blood samples collected during a prospective multicentre observational study of children <15 years of age hospitalised in Belgium with X-ray-confirmed CAP. Blood samples were collected at admission and 3-4 weeks later. Pneumococcal (P)-CAP was defined in the presence of a positive blood or pleural fluid culture. Serotyping of Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates was done with the Quellung reaction. Serological diagnosis was assessed for nine serotypes using World Health Organization validated IgG and IgA serotype-specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs). RESULTS: Paired admission/convalescent sera from 163 children were evaluated by ELISA (35 with proven P-CAP and 128 with non proven P-CAP). ELISA detected pneumococci in 82.8% of patients with proven P-CAP. The serotypes identified were the same as with the Quellung reaction in 82% and 59% of cases by IgG ELISA and IgA ELISA, respectively. Overall, ELISA identified a pneumococcal aetiology in 55% of patients with non-proven P-CAP. Serotypes 1 (51.6%), 7F (19%), and 5 (15.7%) were the most frequent according to IgG ELISA. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the serological assay allows recognition of pneumococcal origin in 55% of CAP patients with negative culture. This assay should improve the diagnosis of P-CAP in children and could be a useful tool for future epidemiological studies on childhood CAP etiology.

Seroprotection against tetanus in patients attending an emergency department in Belgium and evaluation of a bedside immunotest.

BACKGROUND: In most emergency departments, tetanus prophylaxis currently relies on vaccination history. Bedside evaluation of tetanus immunity may improve this process. OBJECTIVES: (i) To determine the seroprevalence of tetanus immunity; (ii) to evaluate the accuracy of vaccination history in assessing tetanus immunity; (iii) to identify factors predictive of seroprotection and incorrect history. METHOD: In a prospective observational study, tetanus immunity was assessed in 784 adults using Tétanos Quick Stick (TQS). A questionnaire was completed to obtain vaccination and general histories. Immunity assessed by TQS and by vaccination history were compared with anti-tetanus antibody levels measured by the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (seroprotection threshold >0.15 IU/ml). RESULTS: Overall, 64.2% of patients were protected according to TQS results. Four independent predictors of seroprotection were identified: young age, birthplace in Belgium, male sex and occupational medicine consultation. TQS performance was good: kappa=0.71, sensitivity 85.3%, specificity 87.2%, positive predictive value 92.1% and negative predictive value 77.2%. Seven hundred and sixty-two participants responded to the vaccination history: 23.4% said they were protected, 22.1% that they were not and 54.5% did not know. History performance was poor: kappa=0.27, sensitivity 60.3%, specificity 73.3%, positive predictive value 81.8% and negative predictive value 45.8%. Compared with history, TQS offered a significantly better sensitivity, negative and positive predictive values, but specificity was similar. No predictor of an incorrect history was identified. CONCLUSION: Lack of protective immunity against tetanus is frequent but poorly evaluated by history taking. Several demographic characteristics are good predictors of seroprotection. TQS could be a valuable tool in selected patients to improve tetanus prophylaxis in the emergency department.