Current Trends in Donor Testing to Detect Syphilis Infection

Screening of donors and recipients for infections prior to solid organ transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review is a brief overview of current guidelines on screening donors and candidates for bacterial, fungal, parasitic and viral infections prior to solid organ transplantation. The pretransplant period is an important time to evaluate infection exposure risk based on social history as well as to offer vaccinations.

RECENT FINDINGS

One of the major changes in the past few years has been increased utilization of increased Public Health Service risk, HIV positive, and hepatitis C-positive donors. There has also been increased attention to donor and recipient risks for geographically associated infections, such as endemic fungal infections and flaviviruses.

SUMMARY

Screening for donors and candidates prior to organ transplantation can identify and address infection risks. Diagnosing infections in a timely manner can help guide treatment and additional testing. Use of necessary prophylactic treatment in organ recipients can prevent reactivation of latent infections and improve posttransplant outcomes.

An electrochemical scaffold sensor for rapid syphilis diagnosis

The faster a disease can be diagnosed, the sooner effective treatment can be initiated, motivating a drive to replace standard laboratory techniques with point-of-care technologies that return answers in minutes rather than hours. Thus motivated, we describe the development of an E-DNA scaffold sensor for the rapid and convenient measurement of antibodies diagnostic of syphilis. To achieve this (and in contrast to previous sensors of this class, which relied on single, linear epitopes for detection), we utilized a near full-length antigen as the sensor's recognition element, allowing us to simultaneously display multiple epitopes. The resultant sensor is able to detect antibodies against Treponema pallidum pallidum, the causative agent of syphilis, at clinically relevant concentrations in samples in less than 10 min. Preliminary results obtained using sero-positive and sero-negative human samples suggest the clinical sensitivity and specificity of the approach compare well to current gold-standard tests, while being simple and rapid enough to deploy at the point of care.

KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors

The 2017 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors is intended to assist medical professionals who evaluate living kidney donor candidates and provide care before, during and after donation. The guideline development process followed the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and guideline recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant studies that included critical appraisal of the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations. However, many recommendations, for which there was no evidence or no systematic search for evidence was undertaken by the Evidence Review Team, were issued as ungraded expert opinion recommendations. The guideline work group concluded that a comprehensive approach to risk assessment should replace decisions based on assessments of single risk factors in isolation. Original data analyses were undertaken to produce a "proof-in-concept" risk-prediction model for kidney failure to support a framework for quantitative risk assessment in the donor candidate evaluation and defensible shared decision making. This framework is grounded in the simultaneous consideration of each candidate's profile of demographic and health characteristics. The processes and framework for the donor candidate evaluation are presented, along with recommendations for optimal care before, during, and after donation. Limitations of the evidence are discussed, especially regarding the lack of definitive prospective studies and clinical outcome trials. Suggestions for future research, including the need for continued refinement of long-term risk prediction and novel approaches to estimating donation-attributable risks, are also provided.In citing this document, the following format should be used: Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Living Kidney Donor Work Group. KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors. Transplantation. 2017;101(Suppl 8S):S1-S109.

Comparison of Six Automated Treponema-Specific Antibody Assays

Six different Treponema (TP)-specific immunoassays were compared to the fluorescent treponemal antibody absorption (FTA-ABS) test. A total of 615 samples were tested. The overall percent agreement, analytical sensitivity, and analytical specificity of each assay compared to the FTA-ABS test were as follows: Architect Syphilis TP, 99.2%, 96.8%, and 100%; Cobas Syphilis, 99.8%, 99.4%, and 100%; ADVIA Centaur Syphilis, 99.8%, 99.4%, and 100%; HISCL Anti-TP assay kit, 99.7%, 98.7%, and 100%; Immunoticles Auto3 TP, 99.0%, 97.5%, and 99.6%; Mediace TPLA, 98.0%, 98.1%, and 98.0%. All results that were discrepant between the TP-specific assays were associated with samples from noninfectious cases (11 immunoassay false positives and 7 from previous syphilis cases). Our study demonstrated that TP-specific immunoassays generally showed high sensitivities, specificities, and percentages of agreement compared to FTA-ABS, with rare cases of false-positive or false-negative results. Therefore, most TP-specific immunoassays are acceptable for use in screening for syphilis. However, it is important to perform a thorough review of a patient's clinical and treatment history for interpreting the results of syphilis serology.