Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction Assay to Detect Nasopharyngeal Viruses in Immunocompromised Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure.

acute respiratory failures critical care immunocompromised respiratory viruses

Journal

Chest
ISSN: 1931-3543
Titre abrégé: Chest
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0231335

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Historique:
received: 19 03 2023
revised: 24 07 2023
accepted: 31 07 2023
pubmed: 12 8 2023
medline: 12 8 2023
entrez: 11 8 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

In immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF), the clinical significance of respiratory virus detection in the nasopharynx remains uncertain. Is viral detection in nasopharyngeal swabs associated with causes and outcomes of ARF in immunocompromised patients? This preplanned post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial enrolled immunocompromised patients admitted to 32 ICUs for ARF between May 2016 and December 2017. Nasopharyngeal swabs sampled at inclusion were assessed for 23 respiratory pathogens using multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay. Causes of ARF were established by managing physicians and were reviewed by three expert investigators masked to the multiplex PCR assay results. Associations between virus detection in nasopharyngeal swabs, causes of ARF, and composite outcome of day 28 mortality, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), or both were assessed. Among the 510 sampled patients, the multiplex PCR assay results were positive in 103 patients (20.2%), and a virus was detected in 102 samples: rhinoviruses or enteroviruses in 35.5%, coronaviruses in 10.9%, and flu-like viruses (influenza virus, parainfluenza virus, respiratory syncytial virus, human metapneumovirus) in 52.7%. The cause of ARF varied significantly according to the results of the multiplex PCR assay, especially the proportion of viral pneumonia: 50.0% with flu-like viruses, 14.0% with other viruses, and 3.6% when no virus was detected (P < .001). No difference was found in the composite outcome of day 28 mortality, IMV, or both according to positive assay findings (54.9% vs 54.7%; P = .965). In a pre-established subgroup analysis, flu-like virus detection was associated with a higher rate of day 28 mortality, IMV, or both among recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation compared with those without detected virus. In immunocompromised patients with ARF, the results of nasopharyngeal multiplex PCR assays are not associated with IMV or mortality. A final diagnosis of viral pneumonia is retained in one-third of patients with positive assay results and in one-half of the patients with a flu-like virus.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
In immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF), the clinical significance of respiratory virus detection in the nasopharynx remains uncertain.
RESEARCH QUESTION OBJECTIVE
Is viral detection in nasopharyngeal swabs associated with causes and outcomes of ARF in immunocompromised patients?
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS METHODS
This preplanned post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial enrolled immunocompromised patients admitted to 32 ICUs for ARF between May 2016 and December 2017. Nasopharyngeal swabs sampled at inclusion were assessed for 23 respiratory pathogens using multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay. Causes of ARF were established by managing physicians and were reviewed by three expert investigators masked to the multiplex PCR assay results. Associations between virus detection in nasopharyngeal swabs, causes of ARF, and composite outcome of day 28 mortality, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), or both were assessed.
RESULTS RESULTS
Among the 510 sampled patients, the multiplex PCR assay results were positive in 103 patients (20.2%), and a virus was detected in 102 samples: rhinoviruses or enteroviruses in 35.5%, coronaviruses in 10.9%, and flu-like viruses (influenza virus, parainfluenza virus, respiratory syncytial virus, human metapneumovirus) in 52.7%. The cause of ARF varied significantly according to the results of the multiplex PCR assay, especially the proportion of viral pneumonia: 50.0% with flu-like viruses, 14.0% with other viruses, and 3.6% when no virus was detected (P < .001). No difference was found in the composite outcome of day 28 mortality, IMV, or both according to positive assay findings (54.9% vs 54.7%; P = .965). In a pre-established subgroup analysis, flu-like virus detection was associated with a higher rate of day 28 mortality, IMV, or both among recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation compared with those without detected virus.
INTERPRETATION CONCLUSIONS
In immunocompromised patients with ARF, the results of nasopharyngeal multiplex PCR assays are not associated with IMV or mortality. A final diagnosis of viral pneumonia is retained in one-third of patients with positive assay results and in one-half of the patients with a flu-like virus.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37567412
pii: S0012-3692(23)05262-5
doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2023.07.4222
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1364-1377

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Financial/Nonfinancial Disclosures The authors have reported to CHEST the following: J. L. reports receiving personal fees from Qiagen and Abbott Rapid Diagnostics SAS. V. L. received support for article research from Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris and is treasurer of the GRRR-OH research group, which has received fees from Pfizer, Fisher-Paykel, Gilead, Astellas, Sanofi, and Alexion. F. B. reports personal fees from Merck Sharp and Dohme and BioMérieux outside the submitted work. A. D. reports grants from the French Ministry of Health; grants and personal fees from Philips, Fisher & Paykel, Respinor, and Lungpacer; personal fees from Baxter, Getinge, Gilead, and Lowenstein; and nonfinancial support from Fisher & Paykel outside the submitted work. E. A. has received fees for lectures from MSD, Pfizer, and Alexion; his institution and research group have received support from Baxter, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Fisher & Paykel, Gilead, Alexion, and Ablynx; and he received support for article research from Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris. None declared (A. M., M. B., S. M.-D., L. F., S. J., K. K., A. K., L. A., N. B., A.-S. M., E. C., F. P., M. S., D. M.).

Auteurs

Alexis Maillard (A)

Service de Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris.

Jérôme Le Goff (J)

Service de Virologie, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris.

Mariame Barry (M)

Service de Virologie, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris.

Virginie Lemiale (V)

Service de Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris.

Séverine Mercier-Delarue (S)

Service de Virologie, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris.

Alexandre Demoule (A)

Service de Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris.

Linda Feghoul (L)

Service de Virologie, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris.

Samir Jaber (S)

Département Anesthésie et Réanimation B, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montpellier, Hôpital Saint-Eloi.

Kada Klouche (K)

Département de Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, Hôpital Lapeyronie, Montpellier.

Achille Kouatchet (A)

Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, CHU d'Angers, Angers.

Laurent Argaud (L)

Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon.

Francois Barbier (F)

Unité de Soins Intensifs Médicaux, La Source Hospital, Centre Hospitalier Régional d'Orléans, Orléans.

Naike Bigé (N)

Service de Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris.

Anne-Sophie Moreau (AS)

Pôle de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Hôpital Roger Salengro, CHU Lille, Lille.

Emmanuel Canet (E)

Service de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes.

Frédéric Pène (F)

Service de Médecine Intensive-Réanimation, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris.

Maud Salmona (M)

Laboratoire de Virologie, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris.

Djamel Mokart (D)

Département d'Anesthésie-Réanimation, Institut Paoli Calmette, Marseille, France.

Elie Azoulay (E)

Service de Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris. Electronic address: elie.azoulay@aphp.fr.

Classifications MeSH