Respiratory viral infections are the most frequent clinical syndrome affecting both children and adults, and early detection is fundamental to avoid infection-related risks and reduce the healthcare costs incurred by unnecessary antibiotic treatments. In this study, performance characteristics of two commercial methods, the Panther Fusion® assay (Hologic Inc., San Diego, CA, USA) were compared to Allplex™ respiratory panels (Seegene, Seoul, South Korea) for the detection of influenza A (Flu A), influenza B (Flu B), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), parainfluenza virus (PIV), human metapneumovirus (hMPV), rhinovirus (RV) and adenovirus (AdV) targets. A total of 865 specimens collected prospectively and retrospectively were included, and discordant results were further examined using another commercial product, R-GENE™ respiratory kits (bioMérieux, Marcy l’Etoile, France). There was high agreement between both methods, with 98.6% concordance and a kappa (k) value of 0.9 (95% CI: 0.89–0.92). A specific analysis of both methods for each viral agent demonstrated comparable sensitivity and specificity, both ranging from 0.83 to 1 with good predictive values for the prospective part of the study. Good agreement between both methods was also found for the κ values obtained (ranging from 97.55% to 98.9%), with the lowest for hMPV (k = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.75–0.91) and RV (k = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.65–0.81). Amplification efficiency, measured according to the value of the cycle threshold (Ct) obtained in each of the amplifications in both tests, was significantly better with Panther Fusion for Flu A, Flu B, hMPV and RV. Regarding discordant results, R-GENE showed higher agreement with Panther Fusion-positive specimens (negative for Allplex; n = 28/71, 34.9%) than with Allplex-positive samples (negative for Panther Fusion; n = 7/49, 14.3%). In summary, Panther Fusion proved to be a more efficient fully-automated methodology, requiring shorter hands-on and turnaround times than Allplex.

Objectives: This study focused on the role that BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) genotypes can play in the development of BKPyV-associated complications in renal transplant recipients. Methods: A retrospective observational study (January 2015 to April 2018) was conducted by analyzing BKPyV genotypes in 180 blood samples with detectable BKPyV viral load (VL) > 1000 copies/mL, from 63 renal transplant recipients. VL and BKPyV genotypes detections were based on real-time PCR (rt-PCR)-specific assays. Results: Forty-four patients (44/63 [69.8%]) were men, and the median age was 55.0 (interquartile range 49.0-66.0 years). Eleven patients had clinical manifestations (11/63 [17.5%]). The most frequently detected genotypes were I (14/63 [22.2%]) and II (13/63 [20.6%]). Half of the patients (33/63 [52.4%]) had a mixed genotype, most with genotypes I and II (25/33 [75.8%]). Patients with infection by mixed genotypesshowed VLs that were detected earlier (in the first year after transplantation) than those with a single genotype (25/33 [75.8%] vs 13/30 [43.3%], P = .009) and demonstrated greater risk of developing clinical manifestations associated with BKPyV (odds ratio 12.609, 95% confidence interval 1.503-105.807). Moreover, patients with first BKPyV VL > 10 000 copies/mL more frequently presented mixed genotypes (12/16 [75.0%] vs 21/47 [44.7%], P = .036). Conclusions:The probability of developing clinical manifestations is higher in infections by mixed genotypes. Therefore, the detection of BKPyV genotypes by rt-PCR can provide relevant information to stratify patients' risk of BKPyV-associated complications and guide the clinical management of BKPyV infection in kidney transplant recipients.

No abstract

No abstract

The clinical significance of molecular detection of respiratory viruses in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples is poorly defined. We performed an observational retrospective study including all patients who underwent a BAL procedure in our institution, regardless of the reason for bronchoscopy, from January 2015 to December 2018. Respiratory viruses were detected by real‐time polymerase chain reaction with a commercial multiplex panel, and a cell culture was performed to detect cytomegalovirus and herpes simplex virus. Positive results were correlated with clinical symptoms and patients' characteristics. Of 540 BAL samples analyzed, 113 (20.9%) were positive for any respiratory virus. Viral detection was significantly associated with respiratory symptoms (83.2% vs. 68.9%, p = .004) and radiological infiltrates (67.3% vs. 52.2%, p = .006). The most frequent viruses detected were rhinovirus (42/113, 37.2%), influenza virus (20/113, 17.7%), and parainfluenza virus (PIV) (16/113, 14.2%). Respiratory pathogens codetections were found in 51/113 (45.1%) BAL samples, including more than one virus (16/51, 31.4%), fungi (8/51, 15.7%), and bacteria (9/51, 17.6%). Viral detection was significantly higher in immunocompromised patients (26.5% vs. 16.9%; p = .022). PIV and human metapneumovirus were mostly observed in lung (50.0%, 8/16) and hemopoietic transplant recipients (25%, 2/8), respectively, with clinical repercussions. Our data underline that molecular diagnosis allows identification of viral agents as the etiology of respiratory infections; however, the high frequency of codetections hinders identification of the agent responsible for the current respiratory symptomatology. Immunocompromised patients are the target population in whom to investigate the presence of respiratory viruses in their BAL samples.