• Colleen E Mayhew, James A Cranford, Duane W Newton, and Allison D Cator.
• Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
• J Emerg Med. 2021 May 1; 60 (5): 591-598.

BackgroundPertussis is a serious public health concern and accurate diagnosis is imperative. Comprehensive, multiplex respiratory pathogen polymerase chain reaction (PCR) panels (RPPs) have recently become popular, but their utility in excluding pertussis infection has not been fully explored.ObjectivesTo determine RPP testing results for pertussis using frozen banked samples that previously tested positive on dedicated Bordetella pertussis PCR testing, and to describe positive test rates for other respiratory pathogens on these samples via RPP.MethodsOur microbiology laboratory retrieved banked nasopharyngeal samples from inpatient, ambulatory, and emergency department sources that were positive for pertussis using B. pertussis PCR testing from March 2015 to October 2017. RPP was performed on thawed, archived samples. Rate of pertussis identification on RPP was determined, and positive tests for other pathogens were tabulated.ResultsA total of 3482 specimens were submitted for pertussis PCR testing during the study period. Of those, 138 (4%) were positive for B. pertussis, and 102 (74%) samples were banked and available for RPP testing. Fifty-seven of 102 (56%) of the banked samples had positive RPP testing for pertussis. Of the 45 samples negative for pertussis on RPP testing, 20 (44%) tested positive for other respiratory pathogens.ConclusionNegative testing for B. pertussis and positive testing for other respiratory pathogens on RPP was common in samples that previously tested positive on dedicated B. pertussis PCR testing, both of which could lead to missed diagnoses of pertussis infection. Clinicians should consider using dedicated pertussis PCR testing if pertussis infection is suspected.Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

14 keywords...

hide…