LEGIONELLA - World Health Organization

LEGIONELLA - World Health Organization LEGIONELLA - World Health Organization

06.12.2012 Views

In the clinical setting, serology is limited in its usefulness as a diagnostic tool for legionellosis because of the length of time required, the need for paired sera, and the difficulty of obtaining appropriate convalescent samples (Stout & Yu, 1997). Although diagnosis by antibody detection from tissues is still useful for epidemiological studies in outbreaks or to establish an infection retrospectively, it has generally been superseded by the urinary antigen test, as discussed above. A single high titre with clinical symptoms suggestive of legionellosis gives a presumptive diagnosis. However, in one study, a single acute-phase antibody titre of 1:256 could not discriminate between cases of Legionella and non-cases (Plouffe et al., 1995). Cross-reactions with other bacteria, such as Campylobacter and Pseudomonas species, have also occurred (Marshall, Boswell & Kudesia, 1994; Boswell, Marshall & Kudesia, 1996; Harrison, 1997). Indirect IFAT is used to diagnose legionellosis by incubating samples with a hyperimmune antiserum and then visualizing them by applying a fluorescently tagged anti-Legionella antibody, fluorescein–isothiocyanate-conjugated immunoglobulin (FITC). A positive control (human reference serum) and a negative control (human serum from a healthy individual) are required (Rose et al., 2002). The sensitivity and specificity of IFAT have only been evaluated using L. pneumophila serogroup 1 antigen; sensitivity and specificity for other serogroups or species are not known (Muder 2000; Lück, Helbig & Schuppler, 2002). Because of the formation of cross-reactive antibodies, about 50% of patients infected by L. pneumophila non-serogroup 1 seroconvert with antigens specific to L. pneumophila serogroup 1 (Edelstein, 2002). A negative result does not exclude legionellosis, and care needs to be taken to confirm a positive result when low numbers of bacteria are seen (Benson & Ward, 1992). Antigen preparation differs between laboratories and manufacturers, resulting in different critical titre levels. For some antigen preparations, specificity could be relatively high for a single specimen, and low for another antigen (Rose et al., 2002). A number of companies produce FITC-labelled antibodies for the detection of L. pneumophila. An FITC-conjugated monoclonal antibody (MAb) directed against L. pneumophila common outer-membrane protein is commercially available, and is preferred because it is more specific than polyclonal reagents. The MAb has the advantage of reacting with all L. pneumophila serogroups, but only identifying L. pneumophila. Genus-specific MAbs are not suitable for immunofluorescence. Direct immunofluorescence assays Direct immunofluorescence assays (DFAs) using antibody conjugated with a fluorochrome require 2–3 hours to complete the staining procedure. DFAs for Legionella species other than L. pneumophila should not ordinarily be used. DFA of sputum remains positive for 2–4 days after the initiation of the specific legionellosis antibiotic therapy, and often for a longer period in cases of a cavitary pulmonary disease (Lück, Helbig & Schuppler, 2002). LEGIONELLA AND THE PREVENTION OF LEGIONELLOSIS

DFA has been used successfully with expectorated sputum, endotracheal suction aspirates, lung biopsies and transtracheal aspirate (Stout, Rihs & Yu, 2003). Pleural fluid examination in patients with legionellosis by culture or DFA rarely yields positive results, but has occasionally been helpful. Between 25% and 70% of patients with culture-proven legionellosis have positive DFA for L. pneumophila, and the test’s specificity is higher than 99.9%. Therefore, a negative result does not rule out legionellosis but a positive result is almost always diagnostic, provided that the slide is read correctly. Care must be taken to prevent false-positive results of DFA. These can result from clinical specimens coming into contact with contaminated water, such as contaminated buffers or organisms washed from positive control slides (Lück, Helbig & Schuppler, 2002). In addition, skill and experience are required to interpret the DFA; therefore, laboratories lacking expertise should be discouraged from using it. Enzyme immunoassays Microagglutination or enzyme immunoassay (EIA) methods can be used to serologically diagnose L. pneumophila serogroup 1 in tissues (Edelstein, 2002). Several EIA serologic diagnostic kits are commercially available, with sensitivity ranging from 80% to 90% and a specificity of about 98%. The sensitivity of kits for testing antibody from serotypes 2–6 is still unknown. The conformity of EIA tests with the immunofluorescence method is about 91% (Edelstein, 2002). 11.2.3 Diagnosing legionellosis using nucleic acid detection Overview of polymerase chain reaction assays L. pneumophila DNA was first detected in clinical samples by a commercial nucleic acid hybridization assay that used a radioisotopically labelled RNA (ribonucleic acid) probe. However, concerns about the sensitivity and specificity of the assay led to its subsequent withdrawal (Fields, Benson & Besser, 2002). Since then, Legionella polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays have been used more actively to detect DNA from environmental samples, but can also be used for analysing clinical samples, particularly those from the respiratory tract. Detection of Legionella and L. pneumophila DNA has been reported using PCR assays (with or without confirmation by blot hybridization or sequencing) (Mahbubani et al., 1990; Lisby & Dessau, 1994; Ko et al., 2003; Liu et al., 2003), including those targeting: • ribosomal RNA (rRNA) genes or their intergenic spacer regions • a gene coding for heat-shock protein (dnaJ) • the RNA polymerase gene (rpoB) • the macrophage infectivity potentiator (mip) gene. LEGIONELLA AND THE PREVENTION OF LEGIONELLOSIS

In the clinical setting, serology is limited in its usefulness as a diagnostic tool for legionellosis<br />

because of the length of time required, the need for paired sera, and the difficulty of obtaining<br />

appropriate convalescent samples (Stout & Yu, 1997). Although diagnosis by antibody detection<br />

from tissues is still useful for epidemiological studies in outbreaks or to establish an infection<br />

retrospectively, it has generally been superseded by the urinary antigen test, as discussed above.<br />

A single high titre with clinical symptoms suggestive of legionellosis gives a presumptive<br />

diagnosis. However, in one study, a single acute-phase antibody titre of 1:256 could not<br />

discriminate between cases of Legionella and non-cases (Plouffe et al., 1995). Cross-reactions<br />

with other bacteria, such as Campylobacter and Pseudomonas species, have also occurred (Marshall,<br />

Boswell & Kudesia, 1994; Boswell, Marshall & Kudesia, 1996; Harrison, 1997).<br />

Indirect IFAT is used to diagnose legionellosis by incubating samples with a hyperimmune<br />

antiserum and then visualizing them by applying a fluorescently tagged anti-Legionella antibody,<br />

fluorescein–isothiocyanate-conjugated immunoglobulin (FITC). A positive control (human<br />

reference serum) and a negative control (human serum from a healthy individual) are required<br />

(Rose et al., 2002). The sensitivity and specificity of IFAT have only been evaluated using<br />

L. pneumophila serogroup 1 antigen; sensitivity and specificity for other serogroups or species<br />

are not known (Muder 2000; Lück, Helbig & Schuppler, 2002). Because of the formation of<br />

cross-reactive antibodies, about 50% of patients infected by L. pneumophila non-serogroup 1<br />

seroconvert with antigens specific to L. pneumophila serogroup 1 (Edelstein, 2002). A negative<br />

result does not exclude legionellosis, and care needs to be taken to confirm a positive result<br />

when low numbers of bacteria are seen (Benson & Ward, 1992).<br />

Antigen preparation differs between laboratories and manufacturers, resulting in different<br />

critical titre levels. For some antigen preparations, specificity could be relatively high for a single<br />

specimen, and low for another antigen (Rose et al., 2002).<br />

A number of companies produce FITC-labelled antibodies for the detection of L. pneumophila.<br />

An FITC-conjugated monoclonal antibody (MAb) directed against L. pneumophila common<br />

outer-membrane protein is commercially available, and is preferred because it is more specific<br />

than polyclonal reagents. The MAb has the advantage of reacting with all L. pneumophila<br />

serogroups, but only identifying L. pneumophila. Genus-specific MAbs are not suitable for<br />

immunofluorescence.<br />

Direct immunofluorescence assays<br />

Direct immunofluorescence assays (DFAs) using antibody conjugated with a fluorochrome<br />

require 2–3 hours to complete the staining procedure. DFAs for Legionella species other than<br />

L. pneumophila should not ordinarily be used. DFA of sputum remains positive for 2–4 days<br />

after the initiation of the specific legionellosis antibiotic therapy, and often for a longer period<br />

in cases of a cavitary pulmonary disease (Lück, Helbig & Schuppler, 2002).<br />

<strong>LEGIONELLA</strong> AND THE PREVENTION OF LEGIONELLOSIS

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!