Ula Khatib1, Diederik van de Beek1, John A Lees2, Matthijs C Brouwer3. 1. Department of Neurology, Center of Infection and Immunity Amsterdam (CINIMA), Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 2. Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, UK. 3. Department of Neurology, Center of Infection and Immunity Amsterdam (CINIMA), Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: m.c.brouwer@amc.uva.nl.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To study the diagnostic accuracy of clinical and laboratory features in the diagnosis of central nervous system (CNS) infection and bacterial meningitis. METHODS: We included consecutive adult episodes with suspected CNS infection who underwent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) examination. The reference standard was the diagnosis classified into five categories: 1) CNS infection; 2) CNS inflammation without infection; 3) other neurological disorder; 4) non-neurological infection; and 5) other systemic disorder. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2015, 363 episodes of suspected CNS infection were included. CSF examination showed leucocyte count >5/mm3 in 47% of episodes. Overall, 89 of 363 episodes were categorized as CNS infection (25%; most commonly viral meningitis [7%], bacterial meningitis [7%], and viral encephalitis [4%]), 36 (10%) episodes as CNS inflammatory disorder, 111 (31%) as systemic infection, in 119 (33%) as other neurological disorder, and 8 (2%) as other systemic disorders. Diagnostic accuracy of individual clinical characteristics and blood tests for the diagnosis of CNS infection or bacterial meningitis was low. CSF leucocytosis differentiated best between bacterial meningitis and other diagnoses (area under the curve [AUC] 0.95) or any neurological infection versus other diagnoses (AUC 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical characteristics fail to differentiate between neurological infections and other diagnoses, and CSF analysis is the main contributor to the final diagnosis.
OBJECTIVES: To study the diagnostic accuracy of clinical and laboratory features in the diagnosis of central nervous system (CNS) infection and bacterial meningitis. METHODS: We included consecutive adult episodes with suspected CNS infection who underwent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) examination. The reference standard was the diagnosis classified into five categories: 1) CNS infection; 2) CNS inflammation without infection; 3) other neurological disorder; 4) non-neurological infection; and 5) other systemic disorder. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2015, 363 episodes of suspected CNS infection were included. CSF examination showed leucocyte count >5/mm3 in 47% of episodes. Overall, 89 of 363 episodes were categorized as CNS infection (25%; most commonly viral meningitis [7%], bacterial meningitis [7%], and viral encephalitis [4%]), 36 (10%) episodes as CNS inflammatory disorder, 111 (31%) as systemic infection, in 119 (33%) as other neurological disorder, and 8 (2%) as other systemic disorders. Diagnostic accuracy of individual clinical characteristics and blood tests for the diagnosis of CNS infection or bacterial meningitis was low. CSF leucocytosis differentiated best between bacterial meningitis and other diagnoses (area under the curve [AUC] 0.95) or any neurological infection versus other diagnoses (AUC 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical characteristics fail to differentiate between neurological infections and other diagnoses, and CSF analysis is the main contributor to the final diagnosis.
Authors: Joost M Costerus; Cynthia M C Lemmens; Diederik van de Beek; Matthijs C Brouwer Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2020-06-10 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Louise Sigfrid; Chelsea Perfect; Amanda Rojek; Kajsa-Stina Longuere; Sam Lipworth; Eli Harriss; James Lee; Alex Salam; Gail Carson; Herman Goossens; Peter Horby Journal: BMC Med Date: 2019-09-06 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Tehmina Bharucha; Serena Vickers; Damien Ming; Sue J Lee; Audrey Dubot-Pérès; Xavier de Lamballerie; Paul N Newton Journal: Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 2.184
Authors: Arthur W D Edridge; Martin Deijs; Ingeborg E van Zeggeren; Cormac M Kinsella; Maarten F Jebbink; Margreet Bakker; Diederik van de Beek; Matthijs C Brouwer; Lia van der Hoek Journal: Genes (Basel) Date: 2019-04-30 Impact factor: 4.096