[Epidemiology and diagnosis of respiratory syncitial virus in adults]

Introduction

Le virus respiratoire syncytial (VRS) est rarement recherché dans les infections respiratoires de l’adulte. Ce travail en étudie la fréquence et le diagnostic.

Méthodes

Trois enquêtes distinctes ont été menées chez des adultes atteints soit d’un syndrome pseudo-grippal, d’une infection respiratoire basse communautaire ou hospitalisés pour une pneumopathie infectieuse grave. La recherche du VRS a été faite par PCR dans tous les cas et comparée à la détection antigénique et la culture dans deux enquêtes.

Résultats

Le VRS est identifié chez 20 (11,7 %) des 170 adultes vaccinés contre la grippe atteints d’un syndrome pseudo-grippal. Dans 270 infections respiratoires basses communautaires sans signes de gravité on trouve un virus dans 86 (31,8 %) cas, dont 13 VRS (4,8 %) ; un virus est détecté dans 64 (36,7 %) des 164 bronchites aiguës : 11 VRS (6,3 %), 37 rhinovirus (21,3 %), 5 virus influenza A et B, et 12 autres virus ; dans les 60 bronchites chroniques surinfectées, il y a 9 rhinovirus (15 %), 2 virus parainfluenza 3 et aucun VRS ; dans les 21 pneumopathies infectieuses aiguës, on trouve 1 VRS, 1 virus influenza A et 2 rhinovirus, et dans les 11 cas d’infections respiratoires basses sur poumon pathologique, 1 VRS, 1 virus parainfluenza 3 et 4 rhinovirus ; il y a au total 19 infections bactériennes et virales associées. Enfin, dans les 51 pneumopathies infectieuses avec détresse respiratoire hospitalisées en réanimation, un virus est isolé dans 17 (33,3 %) cas : 3 VRS (5,8 %), 6 virus influenza A, 3 rhinovirus, 2 adénovirus, 2 herpes simplex et un CMV ; il y a 6 infections bactériennes associées dont 4 d’origine nosocomiale. Tous les patients infectés par le VRS sont âgés et présentent un facteur de risque respiratoire ou cardiaque.

Conclusions

Chez l’adulte le VRS est responsable de fréquents syndromes pseudo-grippaux et parfois d’infections respiratoires basses, qui peuvent être graves et qu’il faut penser à rechercher. La technique PCR est particulièrement efficace mais non disponible en routine.

[Regional evaluation of long-term care facilities for the elderly]

The increase in the total number of very elderly people demands the precision and specification of the needs of long-term care structures in the coming years. A survey conducted in Lower-Normandy is presented and described. Questionnaires were sent to directors of residence homes and nursing homes in order to investigate their operations and their problems. The increase in the number of spaces to foresee seems moderate if the progressive trend remains unchanged (+1% per year until the year 2010), but within the same timeframe, the demographic decline in the number of potential family helpers and home health workers to take care of the elderly in their homes, coupled with the establishment of a new state allowance for dependent people, could alter the situation. Furthermore, more than 50% of nursing homes and residence homes for the elderly are in need of significant improvements: a reduction in the number of shared rooms (52.5% of nursing homes) and the development of equipment to meet the needs of the handicapped and disabled. The means in personnel and staff qualifications are particularly heterogeneous and difficulties in coping with dependency are reported most everywhere. The application of the 1999 decree stipulating the approval of these structures based upon thorough evaluations of available services is urgently needed.

Comparison of three non-nested RT-PCR for the detection of influenza A viruses

BACKGROUND

The viral isolation technique (VIT) is largely used as a gold standard for the detection of influenza A and B viruses in respiratory samples. Some recent studies have pointed out that the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays allow sensitive and rapid detection of influenza viruses, also providing excellent correlation with traditional methods.

OBJECTIVES AND DESIGN STUDY

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of three non-nested PCR, two PCR-hybridization assays using primers defined in M and NS genes, and one PCR which uses primers defined in NP, NS and HA genes and combines the detection of H3N2 and H1N1 hemagglutinin genes using defined primers in NP, NS and HA genes (PCR3), in comparison with an IF assay (IFA) and viral isolation technique (VIT). The study was carried out on 244 nasal samples collected mainly by practitioners of the GROG surveillance network during winter 1998-1999 for the detection of influenza A virus.

RESULTS

Overall influenza viruses were detected more frequently by PCR techniques in 157 (64.3%), 147 (60.2%), 110 (45%) cases for PCR1, PCR2, PCR3, respectively, than by VIT or IFA, in 100 (40.9%) and 74 (30.3%) cases, respectively. Taking the positive culture samples as a reference, 100 (41.8%) samples were found to be positive for influenza A, and the sensitivity of IFA, PCR 1, PCR 2 and PCR3 techniques were 70, 100, 99, and 90%, respectively as compared with viral isolation cultures. On the other hand, as 86.5% of positive samples were positive with at least two different techniques, the sensitivity, specificity, VPP and VPN of each technique were recalculated taking into account a further criterion defining a positive sample: positivity with two techniques. We observe that techniques PCR 2 and particularly PCR 1 have very good sensitivity, respectively 98.6 and 100%, far better than the traditional techniques, IFA and culture, whilst maintaining acceptable specificity: 94.1 and 86.1%, respectively. In both cases they enable 141 (57.7%) A-positive influenza samples to be detected instead of the 100 (40.9%) obtained when culture is the reference test. IFA, culture and PCR 3 are highly specific (VPP=100%), but in comparison with PCR 1 and 2 their sensitivity, respectively 51.7, 69. 9, 77.6%, and negative predictive value are unsatisfactory. PCR 1 and 2 are superior to the other techniques to a statistically highly significant degree in terms of sensitivity, but the difference between the two is not significant.