A case report of false negative Legionella test results in a chlorinated public hot water distribution system due to the lack of sodium thiosulfate in sampling bottles

We examined samples from the showers and the central water distribution system of a public building with an indoor swimming pool. The pool was used for school and recreational activities and as a sports therapy facility for patients with coronary heart disease. The building's hot water system was contaminated with Legionella pneumophila. Due to the building's intricate piping system, several attempts to completely eliminate legionellae by thermal and chemical disinfection had failed, so an external sanitation company was charged with the installation of a continuous chlorination device in order to keep Legionella concentrations low. The laboratory which was contracted by the sanitation company to monitor bacteria levels after installation of the chlorination device used sampling bottles without sodium thiosulfate and repeatedly reported an absence of Legionella. However, up to 69,000 colony forming particles (CFP) of Legionella pneumophila (Lp) per litre and up to 171 CFP/ml of heterotrophic bacteria could be detected when parallel samples were collected in bottles containing sodium thiosulfate at standard concentrations. Laboratories, epidemiologists, public health officials and technical staff who may be in charge of delivering, preparing or using sterile sampling devices for the collection of environmental samples to be tested for legionellae should be aware that cultures can return false negative results if the sampling containers used to collect chlorinated drinking water or chlorinated pool water samples do not contain a neutralizing agent to instantly inactivate residual halogen biocides. False negative results may lead to a false sense of security regarding the safety of water systems or the success of disinfection measures, and may thus endanger public health or even hinder the epidemiological clarification of outbreaks.     

A critical commentary and updating of the guinea pig maximization test

The guinea pig maximization test (GPMT) of Magnusson and Kligman was published in 1969. Since then, a vast body of practical experience with the test has been accumulated. New information requires that certain aspects of the procedure be reevaluated, especially with regard to the interpretation of challenge results. In particular, awareness of the phenomenon of hyperirritable skin (the 'angry back' phenomenon) suggests that presently used controls are not always adequate and may overstate allergenicity owing to false-positive reactions. The control group should be exposed to a chemical insult at induction which provokes an inflammatory reaction comparable to the test substance. We present strategies to distinguish irritant from allergic responses. Allergic reactions should persist on rechallenge weeks later, while nonspecific irritant reactions generally fade and are irreproducible in particular animals. Finally, when a chemical is identified as a contact sensitizer of risk is necessary to estimate the relevance of the test result to usage in the real world.     

False-negative and False-positive Errors in Abdominal Pain Evaluation Failure to Diagnose Acute Appendicitis and Unnecessary Surgery

OBJECTIVES: To test the hypothesis that physician errors (failure to diagnose appendicitis at initial evaluation) correlate with adverse outcome. The authors also postulated that physician errors would correlate with delays in surgery, delays in surgery would correlate with adverse outcomes, and physician errors would occur on patients with atypical presentations. METHODS: This was a retrospective two-arm observational cohort study at 12 acute care hospitals: 1) consecutive patients who had an appendectomy for appendicitis and 2) consecutive emergency department abdominal pain patients. Outcome measures were adverse events (perforation, abscess) and physician diagnostic performance (false-positive decisions, false-negative decisions). RESULTS: The appendectomy arm of the study included 1, 026 patients with 110 (10.5%) false-positive decisions (range by hospital 4.7% to 19.5%). Of the 916 patients with appendicitis, 170 (18.6%) false-negative decisions were made (range by hospital 10.6% to 27.8%). Patients who had false-negative decisions had increased risks of perforation (r = 0.59, p = 0.058) and of abscess formation (r = 0.81, p = 0.002). For admitted patients, when the inhospital delay before surgery was >20 hours, the risk of perforation was increased [2.9 odds ratio (OR) 95% CI = 1.8 to 4.8]. The amount of delay from initial physician evaluation until surgery varied with physician diagnostic performance: 7.0 hours (95% CI = 6.7 to 7.4) if the initial physician made the diagnosis, 72.4 hours (95% CI = 51.2 to 93.7) if the initial office physician missed the diagnosis, and 63.1 hours (95% CI = 47.9 to 78.4) if the initial emergency physician missed the diagnosis. Patients whose diagnosis was initially missed by the physician had fewer signs and symptoms of appendicitis than patients whose diagnosis was made initially [appendicitis score 2.0 (95% CI = 1.6 to 2.3) vs 6.5 (95% CI = 6.4 to 6.7)]. Older patients (>41 years old) had more false-negative decisions and a higher risk of perforation or abscess (3.5 OR 95% CI = 2.4 to 5.1). False-positive decisions were made for patients who had signs and symptoms similar to those of appendicitis patients [appendicitis score 5.7 (95% CI = 5.2 to 6.1) vs 6.5 (95% CI = 6.4 to 6.7)]. Female patients had an increased risk of false-positive surgery (2.3 OR 95% CI = 1.5 to 3.4). The abdominal pain arm of the study included 1,118 consecutive patients submitted by eight hospitals, with 44 patients having appendicitis. Hospitals with observation units compared with hospitals without observation units had a higher "rule out appendicitis" evaluation rate [33.7% (95% CI = 27 to 38) vs 24.7% (95% CI = 23 to 27)] and a similar hospital admission rate (27.6% vs 24.7%, p = NS). There was a lower miss-diagnosis rate (15.1% vs 19.4%, p = NS power 0.02), lower perforation rate (19.0% vs 20.6%, p = NS power 0.05), and lower abscess rate (5.6% vs 6.9%, p = NS power 0.06), but these did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Errors in physician diagnostic decisions correlated with patient clinical findings, i.e., the missed diagnoses were on appendicitis patients with few clinical findings and unnecessary surgeries were on non-appendicitis patients with clinical findings similar to those of patients with appendicitis. Adverse events (perforation, abscess formation) correlated with physician false-negative decisions.     

Cost-effectiveness of interferon-gamma release assay screening for latent tuberculosis infection treatment in Germany

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of the new QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-G) [Cellestis; Carnegie, VIC, Australia] assay for screening and treating of persons who have had close contact with tuberculosis (TB) patients and are suspected of having latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) [hereafter called close-contacts] in Germany. METHODS: The health and economic outcomes of isoniazid treatment of 20-year-old close-contacts were compared in a Markov model over a period of 20 years, using two different cutoff values for the tuberculin skin test (TST), the QFT-G assay alone, or the QFT-G assay as a confirmatory test for the TST results. RESULTS: QFT-G assay-based treatment led to cost savings of $542.9 and 3.8 life-days gained per LTBI case. TST-based treatment at a 10-mm induration size cutoff gained $177.4 and 2.0 life-days gained per test-positive contact. When the cutoff induration size for the TST was reduced to 5 mm, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio fell below the willingness-to-pay threshold ($30,170 per life-years gained) but resulted in unnecessary treatment of 77% of contacts owing to false-positive TST results. Combination with the 5-mm induration size TST cutoff value compared to the results of the QFT-G assay alone reduced the total costs per 1,000 contacts by 1.8% to $222,869. The number treated to prevent 1 TB case was 22 for the two QFT-G assay-based procedures, 40 for the TST at a cutoff induration size of 10 mm, and 96 for the TST at a cutoff induration size of 5 mm. When the sensitivity rates of the TST and the QFT-G assay were compounded, the QFT-G assay strategy alone was slightly less costly (0.6%) than the two-step approach. CONCLUSIONS: Using the QFT-G assay, but especially combining the QFT-G assay following the TST screening of close-contacts at a cutoff induration size of 5 mm before LTBI treatment is highly cost-effective in reducing the disease burden of TB.