Morgane Rossi-Tamisier1, Valérie Moal, René Gerolami, Philippe Colson. 1. Pôle des Maladies Infectieuses et Tropicales Clinique et Biologique, Fédération de Bactériologie-Hygiène-Virologie, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Timone, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, 264 rue Saint-Pierre 13385, Marseille CEDEX 05, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is an emerging clinical threat in Europe among kidney and liver-transplant recipients. The incidence and prevalence of HEV infection in this special population are poorly known. False-negative results have been observed for anti-HEV IgG detection in severely immunocompromized persons. Moreover, large discrepancies have been reported between rates of anti-HEV IgG detection in blood donors and hepatitis E cases. OBJECTIVES: To compare anti-HEV IgG and IgM prevalence using two different commercial microplate enzyme-immuno assays (MEIAs) (Adaltis and Wantai) in 64 kidney-/liver-transplant recipients. STUDY DESIGN: Serum samples tested in our routine clinical practice over the 12/2009-12/2011 period with Adaltis MEIAs were retrospectively tested using Wantai MEIAs. IgG-positive sera were further tested by an immunoblot while those found IgM-positive were further tested with an immunochromatography rapid test and for the presence of HEV RNA. RESULTS: Positive results on anti-HEV IgG testing were obtained for seven (10.9%) compared to 20 (31.3%) serum samples with Adaltis and Wantai assays, respectively (p=0.005). Then, 6/7 (86%) of the serum samples positive with Adaltis and 16/20 (80%) of those positive with Wantai were positive with the immunoblot. One patient with chronic HEV infection was IgG-negative with both MEIAs. Regarding anti-HEV IgM, Adaltis and Wantai assays were concordant for 97% of the serum samples, prevalence being 8% with both MEIAs. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of currently available commercial or in-house anti-HEV IgG MEIAs should be tested comparatively on a panel of serum samples collected from solid organ-transplant recipients, including some who experienced PCR-documented HEV infection.
BACKGROUND:Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is an emerging clinical threat in Europe among kidney and liver-transplant recipients. The incidence and prevalence of HEV infection in this special population are poorly known. False-negative results have been observed for anti-HEV IgG detection in severely immunocompromized persons. Moreover, large discrepancies have been reported between rates of anti-HEV IgG detection in blood donors and hepatitis E cases. OBJECTIVES: To compare anti-HEV IgG and IgM prevalence using two different commercial microplate enzyme-immuno assays (MEIAs) (Adaltis and Wantai) in 64 kidney-/liver-transplant recipients. STUDY DESIGN: Serum samples tested in our routine clinical practice over the 12/2009-12/2011 period with Adaltis MEIAs were retrospectively tested using Wantai MEIAs. IgG-positive sera were further tested by an immunoblot while those found IgM-positive were further tested with an immunochromatography rapid test and for the presence of HEV RNA. RESULTS: Positive results on anti-HEV IgG testing were obtained for seven (10.9%) compared to 20 (31.3%) serum samples with Adaltis and Wantai assays, respectively (p=0.005). Then, 6/7 (86%) of the serum samples positive with Adaltis and 16/20 (80%) of those positive with Wantai were positive with the immunoblot. One patient with chronic HEV infection was IgG-negative with both MEIAs. Regarding anti-HEV IgM, Adaltis and Wantai assays were concordant for 97% of the serum samples, prevalence being 8% with both MEIAs. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of currently available commercial or in-house anti-HEV IgG MEIAs should be tested comparatively on a panel of serum samples collected from solid organ-transplant recipients, including some who experienced PCR-documented HEV infection.
Authors: Heléne Norder; Marie Karlsson; Åsa Mellgren; Jan Konar; Elisabeth Sandberg; Anders Lasson; Maria Castedal; Lars Magnius; Martin Lagging Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2015-12-09 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Anna Parfieniuk-Kowerda; Jerzy Jaroszewicz; Tadeusz W Łapiński; Mariusz Łucejko; Magdalena Maciaszek; Magdalena Świderska; Anna Grzeszczuk; Beata Naumnik; Mirosław Rowiński; Robert Flisiak Journal: Arch Med Sci Date: 2018-12-05 Impact factor: 3.318