Cargando…

Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus intermittent positive cases: Implications for infection control

BACKGROUND: Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) continues to be reported from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Data on the phenomenon of intermittent positive results for MERS-CoV on reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) with negative results in between are lacking...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alfaraj, Sarah H., Al-Tawfiq, Jaffar A., Memish, Ziad A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7115256/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30352694
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2018.08.020
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) continues to be reported from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Data on the phenomenon of intermittent positive results for MERS-CoV on reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) with negative results in between are lacking. Here we describe cases with intermittent positive MERS-CoV test results and highlight the required number of tests to rule out or rule in MERS-CoV infection based on a large retrospective cohort of patients with confirmed MERS-CoV. METHODS: This analysis included cases admitted between January 2014 and December 2017. The included patients had a minimum of 3 nasopharyngeal MERS-CoV RT-PCR tests for confirmation and needed 2 negative samples for MERS-CoV evaluated 48 hours apart with clinical improvement or stabilization apart to ensure clearance. RESULTS: A total of 408 patients with positive MERS-CoV test results were treated at the referring hospital. We excluded 72 patients who had only 1 swab result available in the system and were treated in the initial years of the disease. Of the remaining 336 patients, 300 (89%) had a positive result after 1 swab, 324 (96.5%) had a positive result after 2 consecutive swabs, and 328 (97.6%) had a positive result after 3 consecutive swabs. Of the total cases, 46 (13.7%) had a positive MERS-CoV test then a negative test, followed by positive test results. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that 2 to 3 nasopharyngeal samples are needed to produce the highest yield of positive results for MERS-CoV. In addition, 2 negative results 48 hours apart with clinical improvement or stabilization are needed to clear patients from MERS-CoV. Evaluation of the yield of sputum samples is needed to assess the effectiveness against nasopharyngeal swabs.