Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Breath Res. 2018 Nov 12. doi: 10.1088/1752-7163/aaf010. [Epub ahead of print]

Use of an innovative and non-invasive device for virologic sampling of cough aerosols in patients with community and hospital acquired pneumonia: a pilot study.

Author information

1
Medical Department, Division of Respiratory Diseases, University of Piemonte Orientale, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, C.so Mazzini 18, Novara, Novara, ITALY.
2
Department of Translational Medicine, Emergency Medicine Unit, University of Piemonte Orientale, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Novara, ITALY.
3
Laboratory Medicine Department, Microbiology and Virology Unit, University of Piemonte Orientale, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Novara, ITALY.
4
Medical Department, Division of Respiratory Diseases, University of Piemonte Orientale, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Novara, ITALY.

Abstract


 The aetiology of lower respiratory tract infections is challenging to investigate. Despite the wide array of diagnostic tools, invasive techniques, such as bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), are often required to obtain adequate specimens. PneumoniaCheck™ is a new device that collects aerosol particles from cough, allowing microbiological analyses. Up to now it has been tested only for bacteria detection, but no study has investigated its usefulness for virus identification.
 Methods:
 In this pilot study we included 12 consecutive patients with pneumonia. After testing cough adequacy via a Peak Flow Meter, a sampling with PneumoniaCheck™ was collected and a BAL was performed in each patient. Microbiological analyses for virus identification were performed on each sample and concordance between the two techniques was tested (sensitivity, specificity and positive/negative predictive values), taking BAL results as reference.
 Results:
 BAL was considered adequate in 10 patients. Among them, a viral pathogen was identified by PneumoniaCheck™ 6 times, each on different samples, whereas BAL allowed to detect the presence of a virus on 7 patients (14 positivities). Overall, the specificity for PneumoniaCheck™ to detect a virus was 100%, whereas the sensitivity was 66%. When considering only herpes viruses, PneumoniaCheck™ showed a lower sensitivity, detecting a virus in 1/4 of infected patients (25%).
 Conclusions:
 In this pilot study PneumoniaCheck™ showed a good correlation with BAL for non-herpes virologic identification in pneumonia patients, providing excellent specificity. Further studies on larger population are needed to confirm these results and define its place in the panorama of rapid diagnostic tests for lower respiratory tract infections.

KEYWORDS:

Bronchoalveolar lavage; Cough; Pneumonia; Rapid diagnostic test; Virus

PMID:
30523983
DOI:
10.1088/1752-7163/aaf010

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for IOP Publishing Ltd.
Loading ...
Support Center