Utility of two novel multiplexing assays for the detection of gastrointestinal pathogens – a first experience

Abstract

BackgroundCause for gastroenteritis range from viral, bacterial to parasitic pathogens. Rapid Multiplexing techniques like ProGastro_SSCS and xTAG_GPP can detect broad panels of pathogens simultaneously.We performed a field test with a total number of 347 stool samples from adult hospitalized patients that were tested with the Luminex xTAG GPP assay; of the 157 samples positively tested for at least one pathogen by xTAG GPP a total number of 30 samples was retested with the ProGastro SSCS assay. Assays were compared to standard routine diagnostics.FindingsMultiplexing significantly reduced the time to the initial identification of a pathogen. Moreover, multiplexing detected pathogens for which a diagnostic assays was not requested by the physician and thus may be an important tool for avoiding nosocomial outbreaks.ConclusionThis first frontline approach with these assays approves their utility compared to conventional microbiological methods.

Multiplex tests to identify gastrointestinal bacteria, viruses and parasites in people with suspected infectious gastroenteritis: a systematic review and economic analysis

“…Pathogens were tested according to the physician's request only. Two studies 19,34 considered as few as two pathogens in common with the PHE algorithm, whereas two restricted conventional testing to only five pathogens 28 and four pathogens. 30 Rand et al…”

“…Seven studies 19,22,26,27,29,35,39 reported the setting sufficiently to allow judgement on the origin of the infection (hospital vs. community). The majority of studies 11,12,20,21,[23][24][25]28,[30][31][32][33][34][36][37][38] reported recruitment of hospitalised patients, for which a mixed population should be assumed (in terms of origin of infection) as it is unclear at what point in time during hospitalisation each infection occurred. Only one study was identified as a community study, set in Côte d'Ivoire.…”

“…However, one study reported study-level results for hospital-and community-acquired infections. 27 Country of study Eleven studies 11,22,[27][28][29][30]32,35,[37][38][39] included participants from European countries, including three studies from the UK. 27,30,32 One study was multinational, covering North America and Europe, 21 eight studies were from North America, 12,20,25,26,31,33,34,36 two were from Asia 23,24 and one was from Africa.…”

“…Only two studies 19,32 were rated as having high concern for the applicability with respect to the index tests (because of deviations from the manufacturer's instructions: timing, storage or extraction). The applicability of a comparator was of low concern for six studies (26.1%) 12,21,26,27,29,36 and of high concern for 16 studies (69.6%), 11,19,20,[22][23][24][25]28,[30][31][32][33][34][37][38][39] in which the comparator methods were not consistent with those specified for the PHE algorithm. The applicability concern for a reference standard (i.e.…”

“…11,12,[20][21][22][23]25,[29][30][31][32][33][34]38,39 The remaining eight studies did not use the verification tests (not applicable). 19,24,[26][27][28][35][36][37] Agreement between gastrointestinal pathogen panel tests and conventional methods…”