Assessment of a fully automated RPR assay (Mediace RPR) for serological diagnosis and follow-up of syphilis: a retrospective study

被引:3
作者
Leroy, Anne-Gaelle [1 ]
Robert, Manon [1 ]
Carpentier, Maxime [1 ]
Bastidon, Christophe [2 ]
Gautreau, Blandine [1 ]
Lefebvre, Maeva [3 ]
Bonnet, Benedicte [4 ]
Bernier, Claire [4 ]
Corveca, Stephane [1 ,5 ]
Guillouzouica, Aurelie [1 ]
机构
[1] CHU Nantes Univ Hosp, Dept Microbiol, Nantes, France
[2] CHU Nantes Univ Hosp, Biochem Lab, Nantes, France
[3] CHU Nantes Hotel Dieu, Dept Infect Dis, Nantes, France
[4] CHU Nantes Univ Hosp, Ctr Prevent Infect & Transmissible Dis, Nantes, France
[5] Univ Nantes, INSERM, Nantes, France
关键词
Syphilis; Automated non-treponemal test; Rapid plasma reagin; Syphilis follow-up; Treponema pallidum; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS;
D O I
10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2022.115767
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Objectives: This study assessed the Mediace RPR assay, an automated RPR (aRPR), for syphilis diagnosis and serological follow-up.Methods: Serums from patients positively screened for syphilis between January 2017 and December 2019 were retrospectively selected. A focus was performed on patients with a serological follow-up after treat-ment and/or a reinfection. Serums were tested by both manual (mRPR) and aRPR tests. Categorical and Quantitative Agreements (CA and QA), and serological follow-up conclusions were analyzed.Results: 236 serums from 85 patients (99% of male, 66% of HIV-infected) were included. The overall QA was 54.2%. CA was low (79.7%) especially for samples with low RPR titers. No prozone effect was observed. Sero-logical follow-up after treatment led to similar conclusions, although aRPR titers often decreased faster. Over 26 episodes of reinfection, 4 (15.4%) were misdiagnosed with the aRPR.Conclusions: While the Mediace aRPR presents the advantages of an automated test, its poor sensitivity in low titers may limit its use. (c) 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:5
相关论文
共 13 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2018, J OFFICIEL REPUBLIQU
  • [2] Treatment of Syphilis A Systematic Review
    Clement, Meredith E.
    Okeke, N. Lance
    Hicks, Charles B.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2014, 312 (18): : 1905 - 1917
  • [3] 2020 European guideline on the management of syphilis
    Janier, M.
    Unemo, M.
    Dupin, N.
    Tiplica, G. S.
    Potocnik, M.
    Patel, R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY AND VENEREOLOGY, 2021, 35 (03) : 574 - 588
  • [4] An Update on the Global Epidemiology of Syphilis
    Kojima, Noah
    Klausner, Jeffrey D.
    [J]. CURRENT EPIDEMIOLOGY REPORTS, 2018, 5 (01) : 24 - 38
  • [5] LARSEN SA, 1995, CLIN MICROBIOL REV, V8, P1
  • [6] Comparison of an automated rapid plasma reagin (RPR) test with the conventional RPR card test in syphilis testing
    Lee, Jong-Han
    Lim, Chae Seung
    Lee, Min-Geol
    Kim, Hyon-Suk
    [J]. BMJ OPEN, 2014, 4 (12):
  • [7] Is serological testing a reliable tool in laboratory diagnosis of syphilis?: Meta-analysis of eight external quality control surveys performed by the German infection serology proficiency testing program
    Müller, I
    Brade, V
    Hagedorn, HJ
    Straube, E
    Schörner, C
    Frosch, M
    Hlobil, H
    Stanek, G
    Hunfeld, KP
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2006, 44 (04) : 1335 - 1341
  • [8] Evaluation of an automated quantitative latex immunoturbidimetric non-treponemal assay for diagnosis and follow-up of syphilis: a prospective cohort study
    Osbak, Kara
    Abdellati, Said
    Tsoumanis, Achilleas
    Van Esbroeck, Marjan
    Kestens, Luc
    Crucitti, Tania
    Kenyon, Chris
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2017, 66 (08) : 1130 - 1139
  • [9] Syphilis
    Peeling, Rosanna W.
    Mabey, David
    Kamb, Mary L.
    Chen, Xiang-Sheng
    Radolf, Justin D.
    Benzaken, Adele S.
    [J]. NATURE REVIEWS DISEASE PRIMERS, 2017, 3
  • [10] Sanfilippo AM, 2018, J CLIN MICROBIOL, V56, DOI [10.1128/jcm.00214-18, 10.1128/JCM.00214-18]