Delftia acidovorans: An Unusual Pathogen from an Adenocarcinoma Lung Patient with Pleural Effusion.

Delftia acidovorans (D. acidovorans) is an aerobic, nonfermentative Gram-negative bacillus infrequently isolated from clinical specimens. The pathogenicity and clinical significance of the organism has not been ascertained due to uncommon clinical isolation and suspected low virulence. The organism has been reported to be inherently resistant to aminoglycoside group of drugs which remain as a widely used first-line drug of choice for febrile neutropenic patients. Hereby, we report a case of D. acidovorans-associated pleural effusion in a patient of metastatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed and treated timely and successfully with appropriate antibiotics.

The dilemma of differentiating between acute hepatitis B and chronic hepatitis B with acute exacerbation: Is quantitative serology the answer?

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Acute exacerbations of chronic hepatitis B (CHB-AEs) are common in endemic areas and are often presumed to be acute hepatitis B (AHB) due to their similarities in clinical and serological pictures, presenting a major diagnostic dilemma. This study aimed to identify laboratory markers for differentiating between the two groups, and to establish the cut-off value for significant markers.
. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of records was conducted for patients who presented with clinical features of acute hepatitis along with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and IgM antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (IgM anti-HBc) positivity from May 2015 to May 2017. A total of 172 patients were enrolled and grouped as AHB (n=89) and CHB-AE (n=83) based on their history of hepatitis B virus infection and duration of HBsAg persistence. Virological and biochemical parameters were analyzed and compared. Cut-off values, sensitivity, and specificity of the variables were calculated.
. RESULTS: The median value of signal by cut-off (S/Co) ratio for IgM anti-HBc was significantly higher in AHB group (30.44) compared to CHB-AE group (8.63) with a sensitivity and specificity of 97% and 84%, respectively, at a cut-off of 20.5 (P<0.01). The mean international normalized ratio (INR) was significantly greater in CHB-AE (1.88±1.24) group compared to AHB group (1.62±0.17) with a sensitivity and specificity of 57.9% and 45.1%, respectively, at a cut-off value of 1.27.
. CONCLUSION: A value of 20.5 S/Co of IgM anti-HBc and 1.27 INR could be helpful in differentiating between AHB and CHB-AE. (Clin Mol Hepatol 2020;26:187-195).

Performance evaluation of TRUPCR® HBV Real-time PCR assay for Hepatitis B virus DNA quantification in clinical samples: report from a tertiary care liver centre.

Quantitative Real-time PCR (qPCR) based Hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA load estimation is crucial for the initiation of treatment and serves as a strong predictor of liver disease progression in HBV infected individuals. HBV DNA quantification has been ever evolving with the addition of new qPCR based kits on a regular basis. The study was carried with an objective to evaluate the performance characteristics of a commercially available qPCR kit (TRUPCR®, 3B Black Bio Biotech, India Ltd.) and compare with CE approved qPCR kit (Artus HBV Real-time PCR, Qiagen, Germany). 121 HBV infected patients were prospectively enrolled from July to December 2016. Aliquots of serum samples were tested in parallel by TRUPCR® and Artus for HBV DNA levels. Genotype D was most predominant genotype in 36.9% (38/121) of patients followed by genotype A in 14.6% (15/121) patients. Median viral load as seen by Artus was log10IU/ml 3.37 (interquartile range log10IU/ml 2.10-10.89) as compared to TRUPCR® where it was log10IU/ml 3.54 (interquartile range log10IU/ml 2.67-11.52). A very good correlation was seen between the two assays (R2 = 0.964) with a concordance rate of 92.6% (112/121). The TRUPCR® qPCR HBV kit is capable of providing reliable and rapid HBV DNA quantitation and together with its much lower costs, presents itself as a good alternative.

Use of culture- and ELISA-based toxin assay for detecting Clostridium Difficile, a neglected pathogen: A single-center study from a tertiary care setting.

INTRODUCTION: Clostridium difficile is a Gram-positive spore-bearing anaerobic bacillus increasingly associated with both community- and hospital-acquired colitis and diarrhea. It is the most common identifiable bacterial cause of healthcare-associated diarrhea associated with antibiotic use and one of the most common anaerobic infections. The diagnosis of C. difficile infection includes detection of toxin A/B in stool specimens by direct enzyme immunoassay, culture of pathogen from the stool specimens using a selective agar Cycloserine-Cefoxitin fructose agar (CCFA), tissue culture assay, and detection of glutamate dehydrogenase an enzyme produced by C. difficile. With few reports from India on this disease, the present study was planned to throw more light on the prevalence and utility of laboratory diagnostic methods for C. difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: After taking approval from the Ethics Committee, 150 patients with antibiotic-associated diarrhea were taken as a study group and fifty patients with exposure to antibiotics but who did not develop diarrhea were taken as controls. Stool specimen was processed for both culture on CCFA and toxin detection by IVD Tox A + B ELISA. RESULTS: Only four specimens were culture positive, whereas 13 were ELISA positive. All culture-positive isolates were toxigenic. C. difficile was neither isolated nor its toxin detected in the control group. Culture- and toxin-based assays may not detect all cases of CDAD. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of the present study, culture does not provide any additional yield over toxin assay. Better diagnostic modalities would be required to prove CDAD.

HIV-2 Infection: Where Are We Today?

CONTEXT: The choice of antiretroviral therapy for HIV-2 differs from that for HIV-1, underscoring the importance of differentiating between the two. AIMS: The current study was planned to find out the prevalence of HIV-2 infection at our center and to find out the utility of the current diagnostic algorithm in identifying the type of HIV infection. SETTING AND DESIGN: Retrospective analysis in a tertiary care teaching institute over a period of three years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients diagnosed as HIV infected using NACO/WHO HIV testing strategy III were included in the study. They were classified as HIV-1 infected, HIV-2 infected and HIV-1 and HIV-2 co-infected based on their test results. For discordant samples, immunoblotting result from National Reference Laboratory was considered as final. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Comparison between HIV-1, HIV-2 and HIV-1+2 positive groups for age, gender, route of transmission was made using chi squared test. P value < 0.05 was considered as significant. RESULTS: Of the total of 66,708 patients tested, 5,238 (7.9%) were positive for HIV antibodies. 7.62%, 0.14%, 0.08% and 0.004% were HIV-1, HIV-2, HIV-1 and HIV-2 co-infected and HIV type indeterminate (HIV-1 Indeterminate, 2+) respectively. The current algorithm could not differentiate between the types of HIV infection (as HIV-1 or HIV-2) in 63 (1.2%) cases. CONCLUSION: In areas like the Indian subcontinent, where epidemic of both HIV-1 and HIV-2 infections are ongoing, it is important to modify the current diagnostic algorithms to diagnose and confirm HIV-2 infections.