4.6 Article

Using Multiplex Molecular Testing to Determine the Etiology of Acute Gastroenteritis in Children

Journal

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS
Volume 176, Issue -, Pages 50-+

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2016.05.068

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Luminex Molecular Diagnostics
  2. Luminex Corporation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To detect the etiologic agents of acute gastroenteritis (AGE) in children using broad molecular-based techniques, and compare clinical presentations among etiologies. Study design This was a prospective population-based surveillance study of children aged <6 years with AGE conducted between 2008 and 2011 as part of the New Vaccine Surveillance Network. Stools from patients and healthy controls were tested for 21 gastrointestinal pathogens using the analyte-specific reagent Gastrointestinal Pathogen Panel and an additional reverse transcription real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for sapovirus and astrovirus. Results Of the 216 stool samples from patients with AGE, 152 (70.4%) tested positive for a pathogen, with norovirus genogroup II (n = 78; 36.1%) and Clostridium difficile (n = 35; 16.2%) the most common pathogens detected. Forty-nine patients (22.7%) tested positive for more than 1 pathogen, including 25 (71%) with a C difficile detection. There were no significant clinical differences among the patients with no pathogen detected, those with a single pathogen detected, and those with >= 2 pathogens detected. Conclusion Using a broad molecular testing approach, high rates of enteropathogens were detected in children with AGE, dominated by norovirus genogroup II and C difficile. Coinfections were common but had no identifiable impact on clinical manifestations. As routine diagnostics of AGE progressively evolve toward nucleic acid-based pathogen detection, ongoing systematic studies are needed to better analyze the clinical significance of results.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available