Development and preliminary evaluation of an enzyme immunosorbent assay for the detection of adenovirus type 8

Epidemic kerato-conjunctivitis--do outbreaks have to be epidemic?

PURPOSE

To study: the epidemiology of an outbreak of adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis in a UK teaching hospital; disease presentation and its effect on clinical diagnostic efficiency; patterns of viral transmission between staff and patients; the effectiveness of infection control procedures in minimising outbreaks.

METHODS

Prospective/retrospective clinical audit and retrospective audit of virological culture results: all viral culture swabs taken during an outbreak of adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis were analysed. The case records of patients whose viral swabs were positive for adenoviral culture were traced. The time for viral cultures to become positive (culture positive time) was calculated. Analysis of the case notes was performed to elucidate (1) the source of infection and (2) the risk factors for acquisition of the infection. Retrospective clinical audit was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of infection control procedures. Adenovirus isolates underwent serotyping.

RESULTS

During the 3-month period of study, there were 38 confirmed cases of adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis. This represented a 217% increase in the number of new cases per 3-month period. The case notes for five patients were untraceable. Of the remaining 33 patients, 21 (63%) had acquired their infection either directly or indirectly from the eye department and 22 (67%) had presented with unilateral disease. The rate of misdiagnosis was higher (9/22=42%) in patients presenting with unilateral disease than those presenting with bilateral disease (2/11=18%). Intradepartmental acquisition of infection was associated with invasive procedures, for example use of diagnostic/therapeutic contact lenses. Culture positive times ranged from 3 to 29 days. The introduction of infection control procedures was associated with a dramatic decrease in the incidence of departmentally acquired cases with no new cases after 2 weeks. Multiple serotypes of adenovirus were involved.

CONCLUSION

Outbreaks of adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis are a serious public health issue concerning ophthalmic departments. This audit study illustrates several important points: (1) how hospital-acquired infection can account for a significant proportion of the cases seen, (2) how multiple types of adenovirus can be involved in a single outbreak, (3) that severe unilateral disease is associated with a higher rate of misdiagnosis; and (4) how standard viral culture techniques may not be satisfactory in confirming/disproving infection when the diagnosis is in doubt. The potential benefit of infection control procedures in minimising this outbreak could not be proven within this audit.

Rapid detection and serotyping of adenovirus by direct immunofluorescence

Four fluorescent antibody reagents were evaluated for their suitability for the identification of adenovirus isolates by immunofluorescence. The antibodies used in the reagents consist of monoclonal antibodies against adenovirus type 3 (Ad3), Ad4, Ad8, and adenoviruses of subgroup C (Ad1,2,5,6), serotypes known to occur in outbreaks of disease. Most of the monoclonal antibodies employed were reactive against type-specific antigens found on the hexon protein. Reagents employing two noncompeting anti-hexon antibodies were more sensitive than reagents prepared with only one monoclonal antibody, although both types of reagents exhibited a high degree of specificity. Five hundred and seventeen adenovirus isolates (359 of which had previously been typed by other methods) and 46 nonadenovirus isolates were examined with all four type-specific reagents in parallel with an adenovirus group-specific reagent. The results indicate that direct typing of adenovirus isolates is feasible, leading to significant savings in time compared to other typing methods and should contribute to the management of certain adenovirus infections, particularly during outbreaks.