| Literature DB >> 33150516 |
Erika Kobayashi1, Kakuhiro Yamaguchi2, Rie Nagaoka3, Shinjiro Sakamoto1, Yasushi Horimasu1, Takeshi Masuda1, Shintaro Miyamoto1, Taku Nakashima1, Hiroshi Iwamoto1, Kazunori Fujitaka1, Michiya Yokozaki3, Hiroki Ohge4, Hironobu Hamada5, Noboru Hattori1.
Abstract
The urinary antigen test (UAT) is a rapid diagnostic method for pneumococcal pneumonia, but the high false-negative rate of 30% may affect its reliability. To maximize the utility of UAT, it is necessary to investigate the patient factors affecting UAT results. However, there is no report elucidating the association between its utility and pre-existing lung abnormalities. We retrospectively reviewed 388 patients with pneumococcal pneumonia confirmed by blood and/or sputum culture tests. Finally, 94 of 388 patients who had the results of UAT and computed tomography scans were enrolled to evaluate the association between the utility of UAT and patient factors including pulmonary emphysema and fibrosis. The overall positive rate of UAT was 69.1%. The positive rates of UAT in the patients with emphysema were significantly lower than those in individuals without emphysema (33.3% and 77.6%, p < 0.001). Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that the presence of emphysema was associated with a low positive rate (odds ratio 6.944, 95% confidence interval 2.268-21.231). Multivariate logistic analysis showed that the presence of emphysema and lower levels of serum blood urea nitrogen (BUN) were significantly and independently associated with a low positive rate. The combination of emphysema and BUN can potentially stratify the positive rate of UAT in patients with pneumococcal pneumonia. Patients with pneumococcal pneumonia and emphysema have a lower positive rate of UAT. Additionally, the combination of emphysema and serum BUN value may be useful to evaluate the reliability of the negative results of pneumococcal UAT.Entities:
Keywords: Blood culture; Emphysema; Streptococcus pneumoniae; Urinary antigen test
Year: 2020 PMID: 33150516 DOI: 10.1007/s10096-020-04095-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis ISSN: 0934-9723 Impact factor: 3.267