Cargando…

2799. Inability to Locally Differentiate Rhinovirus/Enterovirus Results Impacts Infection Control Practices

BACKGROUND: Rhinoviruses and Enteroviruses are closely related members of the family picornavirideae; however, they have distinct clinical manifestations. Rhinoviruses cause respiratory infections while Enteroviruses often present as nonspecific febrile illnesses. Enterovirus D68 (EV-D68) is unusual...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Donelan, Susan V, Spitzer, Silvia, Spitzer, Eric
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6810509/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2476
_version_ 1783462273159790592
author Donelan, Susan V
Spitzer, Silvia
Spitzer, Eric
author_facet Donelan, Susan V
Spitzer, Silvia
Spitzer, Eric
author_sort Donelan, Susan V
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Rhinoviruses and Enteroviruses are closely related members of the family picornavirideae; however, they have distinct clinical manifestations. Rhinoviruses cause respiratory infections while Enteroviruses often present as nonspecific febrile illnesses. Enterovirus D68 (EV-D68) is unusual in that although it is classified as an enterovirus it causes respiratory illness. Most of the currently used nucleic acid amplification assays for respiratory viruses do not distinguish between Rhino and Enteroviruses because of their shared homology. Rhino/Enterovirus infections are common in the Summer and Fall. In October of 2018 the NYS DOH issued a health advisory describing increased numbers of EV-D68 infection. Although there is no specific treatment for EV-D68, the advisory recommended contact precautions in addition to the droplet precautions recommended for other respiratory viruses. This recommendation creates logistical difficulties since there are no commercial test-kits that can identify EV-D68. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of EV-D68 among patients admitted to Stony Brook Hospital that tested positive for Rhino/Enterovirus. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs were tested with the BioFire® FilmArray® Respiratory Panel (RP 2) test. 44 Rhino/Enterovirus positive specimens were sent for further identification to the NYS DOH Virology Lab. Enterovirus was differentiated from Rhinovirus by qRT–PCR. EV-D68 was identified by sequencing. RESULTS: During one week in October, 10 patients were admitted with positive EV-D68 (5 adults and 5 children). In contrast, all 21 admitted patients who had specimens sent for typing had Rhinovirus. CONCLUSION: This study confirmed that there was significant EV-D68 activity among patients who required hospitalization consistent with the NYS DOH advisory in the Fall of 2018. In contrast, in the Winter a drop in the prevalence of Rhino/enterovirus was observed. EV-D68 was not found in any of the samples sent for typing. These data informed our internal decision to cohort all patients this past Winter with positive Rhino/enterovirus results, positively impacting patient cohorting capabilities during a time with increased local influenza activity. [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6810509
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68105092019-10-28 2799. Inability to Locally Differentiate Rhinovirus/Enterovirus Results Impacts Infection Control Practices Donelan, Susan V Spitzer, Silvia Spitzer, Eric Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Rhinoviruses and Enteroviruses are closely related members of the family picornavirideae; however, they have distinct clinical manifestations. Rhinoviruses cause respiratory infections while Enteroviruses often present as nonspecific febrile illnesses. Enterovirus D68 (EV-D68) is unusual in that although it is classified as an enterovirus it causes respiratory illness. Most of the currently used nucleic acid amplification assays for respiratory viruses do not distinguish between Rhino and Enteroviruses because of their shared homology. Rhino/Enterovirus infections are common in the Summer and Fall. In October of 2018 the NYS DOH issued a health advisory describing increased numbers of EV-D68 infection. Although there is no specific treatment for EV-D68, the advisory recommended contact precautions in addition to the droplet precautions recommended for other respiratory viruses. This recommendation creates logistical difficulties since there are no commercial test-kits that can identify EV-D68. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of EV-D68 among patients admitted to Stony Brook Hospital that tested positive for Rhino/Enterovirus. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs were tested with the BioFire® FilmArray® Respiratory Panel (RP 2) test. 44 Rhino/Enterovirus positive specimens were sent for further identification to the NYS DOH Virology Lab. Enterovirus was differentiated from Rhinovirus by qRT–PCR. EV-D68 was identified by sequencing. RESULTS: During one week in October, 10 patients were admitted with positive EV-D68 (5 adults and 5 children). In contrast, all 21 admitted patients who had specimens sent for typing had Rhinovirus. CONCLUSION: This study confirmed that there was significant EV-D68 activity among patients who required hospitalization consistent with the NYS DOH advisory in the Fall of 2018. In contrast, in the Winter a drop in the prevalence of Rhino/enterovirus was observed. EV-D68 was not found in any of the samples sent for typing. These data informed our internal decision to cohort all patients this past Winter with positive Rhino/enterovirus results, positively impacting patient cohorting capabilities during a time with increased local influenza activity. [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6810509/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2476 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Abstracts
Donelan, Susan V
Spitzer, Silvia
Spitzer, Eric
2799. Inability to Locally Differentiate Rhinovirus/Enterovirus Results Impacts Infection Control Practices
title 2799. Inability to Locally Differentiate Rhinovirus/Enterovirus Results Impacts Infection Control Practices
title_full 2799. Inability to Locally Differentiate Rhinovirus/Enterovirus Results Impacts Infection Control Practices
title_fullStr 2799. Inability to Locally Differentiate Rhinovirus/Enterovirus Results Impacts Infection Control Practices
title_full_unstemmed 2799. Inability to Locally Differentiate Rhinovirus/Enterovirus Results Impacts Infection Control Practices
title_short 2799. Inability to Locally Differentiate Rhinovirus/Enterovirus Results Impacts Infection Control Practices
title_sort 2799. inability to locally differentiate rhinovirus/enterovirus results impacts infection control practices
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6810509/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2476
work_keys_str_mv AT donelansusanv 2799inabilitytolocallydifferentiaterhinovirusenterovirusresultsimpactsinfectioncontrolpractices
AT spitzersilvia 2799inabilitytolocallydifferentiaterhinovirusenterovirusresultsimpactsinfectioncontrolpractices
AT spitzereric 2799inabilitytolocallydifferentiaterhinovirusenterovirusresultsimpactsinfectioncontrolpractices