Article

Utility of Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction in Leptospirosis Diagnosis: Association of Level of Leptospiremia and Clinical Manifestations in Sri Lanka

Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0741, USA.
Clinical Infectious Diseases (Impact Factor: 9.42). 02/2012; 54(9):1249-55. DOI: 10.1093/cid/cis035
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), despite cost and logistical challenges, has the potential to provide accurate and timely diagnosis for leptospirosis at the point-of-care in endemic areas. We studied optimal sample types for qPCR, timing of sampling, and clinical manifestations in relation to quantitative leptospiremia.
A new qPCR assay using pathogenic Leptospira-specific 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) gene Taqman primers and an optimized temperature stepdown protocol was used to analyze patient blood samples. Serum was compared with whole blood as sample source. Quantitative leptospiremia was compared with clinical manifestations of leptospirosis and outcome.
The diagnostic sensitivity of qPCR of whole blood and serum was 18.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.97%-31.4%) and 51.0% (95% CI: 37.5%-64.4%) respectively. The qPCR on suspected cases confirmed infection in 58 of 381 cases (15.2%). Of these, 6 cases confirmed by nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and sequencing were serologically negative using a standard but not regionally optimized microscopic agglutination test panel. The bacterial load in serum/blood ranged from 10(2) to 10(6) Leptospira/mL. Median leptospiral load for uncomplicated, renal failure, myocarditis, and multi-organ failure patients were 8616, 11007, 36100, and 15882 Leptospira/mL respectively. The qPCR window of positivity ranged from day 2 to day 15; sensitivity of qPCR was not affected by the length of the interval between the onset of symptoms and sample collection (P = .328).
Quantitative PCR shows potential as a valid diagnostic test with a wider window of positivity than previously thought. Quantitative leptospiremia in serum/whole blood samples did not directly correlate with clinical manifestations of outcome in this patient population.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Suneth Buddhika Agampodi, Jul 08, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
112 Views
  • 07/2012; 3(3):37-9. DOI:10.5365/WPSAR.2012.3.3.001
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Leptospirosis is a major public health concern in New Caledonia (NC) and in other tropical countries. Severe manifestations of the disease are estimated to occur in 5-15% of all human infections worldwide and factors associated with these forms are poorly understood. Our objectives were to identify risk factors and predictors of severe forms of leptospirosis in adults. We conducted a retrospective case-control study of inpatients with laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis who were admitted to two public hospitals in NC in 2008-2011. Cases were patients with fatal or severe leptospirosis, as determined by clinical criteria. This approach was meant to be pragmatic and to reflect the routine medical management of patients. Controls were defined as patients hospitalized for milder leptospirosis. Risk and prognostic factors were identified by multivariate logistic regression. Among the 176 patients enrolled in the study, 71 had criteria of severity including 10 deaths (Case Fatality Rate = 14.1%). Three risk factors were independently associated with severe leptospirosis: current cigarette smoking (OR = 2.94 [CI 1.45-5.96]); delays >2 days between the onset of symptoms and the initiation of antibiotherapy (OR = 2.78 [CI 1.31-5.91]); and Leptospira interrogans serogroup Icterohaemorrhagiae as the infecting strain (OR = 2.79 [CI 1.26-6.18]). The following post-admission laboratory results correlated with poor prognoses: platelet count ≤50,000/µL (OR = 6.36 [CI 1.79-22.62]), serum creatinine >200 mM (OR = 5.86 [CI 1.61-21.27]), serum lactate >2.5 mM (OR = 5.14 [CI 1.57-16.87]), serum amylase >250 UI/L (OR = 4.66 [CI 1.39-15.69]) and leptospiremia >1000 leptospires/mL (OR = 4.31 [CI 1.17-15.92]). TO ASSESS THE RISK OF DEVELOPING SEVERE LEPTOSPIROSIS, OUR STUDY ILLUSTRATES THE BENEFIT FOR CLINICIANS TO HAVE: i) the identification of the infective strain, ii) a critical threshold of qPCR-determined leptospiremia and iii) early laboratory results. In New Caledonia, preventative measures should focus on early presumptive antibacterial therapy and on rodent (reservoir of Icterohaemorrhagiae serogroup) control.
    PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 01/2013; 7(1):e1991. DOI:10.1371/journal.pntd.0001991 · 4.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The recent roll-out of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for malaria has highlighted the decreasing proportion of malaria-attributable illness in endemic areas. Unfortunately, once malaria is excluded, there are few accessible diagnostic tools to guide the management of severe febrile illnesses in low resource settings. This review summarizes the current state of RDT development for several key infections, including dengue fever, enteric fever, leptospirosis, brucellosis, visceral leishmaniasis and human African trypanosomiasis, and highlights many remaining gaps. Most RDTs for non-malarial tropical infections currently rely on the detection of host antibodies against a single infectious agent. The sensitivity and specificity of host-antibody detection tests are both inherently limited. Moreover, prolonged antibody responses to many infections preclude the use of most serological RDTs for monitoring response to treatment and/or for diagnosing relapse. Considering these limitations, there is a pressing need for sensitive pathogen-detection-based RDTs, as have been successfully developed for malaria and dengue. Ultimately, integration of RDTs into a validated syndromic approach to tropical fevers is urgently needed. Related research priorities are to define the evolving epidemiology of fever in the tropics, and to determine how combinations of RDTs could be best used to improve the management of severe and treatable infections requiring specific therapy.
    Clinical Microbiology and Infection 01/2013; 19(5). DOI:10.1111/1469-0691.12154 · 5.20 Impact Factor