Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases

Muhammad Amjad

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12

| Peer-Reviewed

Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases

Muhammad Amjad

Published in International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology (Volume 6, Issue 1)

Received: 10 February 2021 Accepted: 2 March 2021 Published: 10 March 2021

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) are the most common diseases worldwide and an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Upper and lower respiratory tract infections are caused by a variety of bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogens. Clinical diagnosis of respiratory tract infections is challenging because of indistinguishable symptoms. Laboratory diagnosis is performed by serology, culture, electron microscopy, and immunological antigen detection assays. These conventional diagnostic procedures are time consuming, lack sensitivity, require special laboratory setup, and well-trained staff. In the clinical laboratories, multiplex molecular nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are continuously replacing conventional diagnostic methods. This review summarizes and discusses the availability, clinical use, advantages and disadvantages of multiplex molecular methods in the detection and identification of ARTI pathogens. The multiplex molecular assays can simultaneously detect 20 or more bacterial and viral pathogens and have the advantage of increased sensitivity, specificity, and rapid turn-around time. These assays are helpful in syndromic based testing in high risk patient population, particularly those who are immunocompromised, hospitalized and/or seen in the emergency department. Limitations of multiplex molecular assays include inability to detect all the possible pathogens that can be present, not being able to differentiate between asymptomatic carriers and true infections, and sometimes results are difficult to interpret. Furthermore, additional testing may be required as these assays do not provide any information regarding antimicrobial susceptibility profile. Rapid and accurate diagnosis of respiratory tract infections leads to better treatment decisions, reduction in the further diagnostic procedures, length of hospital stay, better infection control measures, and associated healthcare costs.

Published in	International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology (Volume 6, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12
Page(s)	9-20
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Respiratory Pathogens, Respiratory Infections, Molecular Diagnostics, Multiplex Assays, Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests

References

[1]	Bryce, J., et al., WHO estimates of the causes of death in children. Lancet, 2005. 365 (9465): p. 1147-52.
[2]	Feldman, C. and E. Shaddock, Epidemiology of lower respiratory tract infections in adults. Expert Rev Respir Med, 2019. 13 (1): p. 63-77.
[3]	Dowell, J. C., et al., Epidemiology of Cause of Death in Pediatric Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. Crit Care Med, 2018. 46 (11): p. 1811-1819.
[4]	Ye, S. and T. Wang, Laboratory epidemiology of respiratory viruses in a large children's hospital: A STROBE-compliant article. Medicine (Baltimore), 2018. 97 (30): p. e11385.
[5]	Varghese, B. M., et al., Epidemiology of viral respiratory infections in Australian working-age adults (20-64 years): 2010-2013. Epidemiol Infect, 2018. 146 (5): p. 619-626.
[6]	Liu, P., et al., Epidemiology of Respiratory Pathogens in Children with Lower Respiratory Tract Infections in Shanghai, China, from 2013 to 2015. Jpn J Infect Dis, 2018. 71 (1): p. 39-44.
[7]	Brealey, J. C., et al., Viral bacterial co-infection of the respiratory tract during early childhood. FEMS Microbiol Lett, 2015. 362 (10).
[8]	Zhang, S., W. Zhang, and Y. W. Tang, Molecular diagnosis of viral respiratory infections. Curr Infect Dis Rep, 2011. 13 (2): p. 149-58.
[9]	Barenfanger, J., et al., Clinical and financial benefits of rapid detection of respiratory viruses: an outcomes study. J Clin Microbiol, 2000. 38 (8): p. 2824-8.
[10]	Green, D. A., et al., Clinical Utility of On-Demand Multiplex Respiratory Pathogen Testing among Adult Outpatients. J Clin Microbiol, 2016. 54 (12): p. 2950-2955.
[11]	Hanson, K. E. and M. R. Couturier, Multiplexed Molecular Diagnostics for Respiratory, Gastrointestinal, and Central Nervous System Infections. Clin Infect Dis, 2016. 63 (10): p. 1361-1367.
[12]	Qavi, A. J., et al., Repeat Molecular Testing for Respiratory Pathogens: Diagnostic Gain or Diminishing Returns? J Appl Lab Med, 2020. 5 (5): p. 897-907.
[13]	Mandelia, Y., et al., Optimal Timing of Repeat Multiplex Molecular Testing for Respiratory Viruses. J Clin Microbiol, 2020. 58 (2).
[14]	Hattoufi, K., et al., Molecular Diagnosis of Pneumonia Using Multiplex Real-Time PCR Assay Respi Finder (R) SMART 22 FAST in a Group of Moroccan Infants. Adv Virol, 2020. 2020: p. 6212643.
[15]	Raymaekers, M., et al., Timely diagnosis of respiratory tract infections: evaluation of the performance of the Respifinder assay compared to the xTAG respiratory viral panel assay. J Clin Virol, 2011. 52 (4): p. 314-6.
[16]	Reijans, M., et al., RespiFinder: a new multiparameter test to differentially identify fifteen respiratory viruses. J Clin Microbiol, 2008. 46 (4): p. 1232-40.
[17]	Beckmann, C. and H. H. Hirsch, Comparing Luminex NxTAG-Respiratory Pathogen Panel and RespiFinder-22 for multiplex detection of respiratory pathogens. J Med Virol, 2016. 88 (8): p. 1319-24.
[18]	Dabisch-Ruthe, M., et al., Comparison of three multiplex PCR assays for the detection of respiratory viral infections: evaluation of xTAG respiratory virus panel fast assay, RespiFinder 19 assay and RespiFinder SMART 22 assay. BMC Infect Dis, 2012. 12: p. 163.
[19]	Salez, N., et al., Evaluation of Four Commercial Multiplex Molecular Tests for the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infections. PLoS One, 2015. 10 (6): p. e0130378.
[20]	Al-Romaihi, H. E., et al., Epidemiology of respiratory infections among adults in Qatar (2012-2017). PLoS One, 2019. 14 (6): p. e0218097.
[21]	Concato, C., et al., Comparison of the Allplex (TM) Respiratory Panel Assays and the automated Fast Track Diagnostics Respiratory pathogens 21 assay for the diagnosis of pediatric respiratory viral infections. Arch Virol, 2020. 165 (5): p. 1191-1196.
[22]	Barratt, K., et al., Comparison of the fast track diagnostics respiratory 21 and Seegene Allplex multiplex polymerase chain reaction assays for the detection of respiratory viruses. Br J Biomed Sci, 2017. 74 (2): p. 85-89.
[23]	Brotons, P., et al., Comparison of NxTAG Respiratory Pathogen Panel and Anyplex II RV16 Tests for Multiplex Detection of Respiratory Pathogens in Hospitalized Children. J Clin Microbiol, 2016. 54 (12): p. 2900-2904.
[24]	Lee, J. M., J. H. Lee, and Y. K. Kim, Laboratory Impact of Rapid Molecular Tests used for the Detection of Respiratory Pathogens. Clin Lab, 2018. 64 (9): p. 1545-1551.
[25]	Bibby, D. F., et al., Comparative evaluation of the Seegene Seeplex RV15 and real-time PCR for respiratory virus detection. J Med Virol, 2011. 83 (8): p. 1469-75.
[26]	Kim, H. K., et al., Comparison of Anyplex II RV16 with the xTAG respiratory viral panel and Seeplex RV15 for detection of respiratory viruses. J Clin Microbiol, 2013. 51 (4): p. 1137-41.
[27]	Cho, C. H., et al., Evaluation of the AdvanSure real-time RT-PCR compared with culture and Seeplex RV15 for simultaneous detection of respiratory viruses. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis, 2014. 79 (1): p. 14-8.
[28]	Gonsalves, S., et al., Multiplexed detection and identification of respiratory pathogens using the NxTAG (R) respiratory pathogen panel. Methods, 2019. 158: p. 61-68.
[29]	Chen, J. H. K., et al., Clinical Evaluation of the New High-Throughput Luminex NxTAG Respiratory Pathogen Panel Assay for Multiplex Respiratory Pathogen Detection. J Clin Microbiol, 2016. 54 (7): p. 1820-1825.
[30]	Lee, C. K., et al., Comparison of Luminex NxTAG Respiratory Pathogen Panel and xTAG Respiratory Viral Panel FAST Version 2 for the Detection of Respiratory Viruses. Ann Lab Med, 2017. 37 (3): p. 267-271.
[31]	Esposito, S., et al., Partial comparison of the NxTAG Respiratory Pathogen Panel Assay with the Luminex xTAG Respiratory Panel Fast Assay V2 and singleplex real-time polymerase chain reaction for detection of respiratory pathogens. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis, 2016. 86 (1): p. 53-7.
[32]	Tavakoli, A., et al., The molecular epidemiology of respiratory viruses in military trainees in Iran. Med J Islam Repub Iran, 2019. 33: p. 40.
[33]	Vliora, C., et al., A prospective study on the epidemiology and clinical significance of viral respiratory infections among pediatric oncology patients. Pediatr Hematol Oncol, 2019. 36 (3): p. 173-186.
[34]	Yoo, I. Y., et al., Evaluation of the BioFire (R) FilmArray (R) Pneumonia Panel for rapid detection of respiratory bacterial pathogens and antibiotic resistance genes in sputum and endotracheal aspirate specimens. Int J Infect Dis, 2020.
[35]	Leber, A. L., et al., Multicenter Evaluation of BioFire FilmArray Respiratory Panel 2 for Detection of Viruses and Bacteria in Nasopharyngeal Swab Samples. J Clin Microbiol, 2018. 56 (6).
[36]	Ruggiero, P., et al., Evaluation of the BioFire FilmArray respiratory panel and the GenMark eSensor respiratory viral panel on lower respiratory tract specimens. J Clin Microbiol, 2014. 52 (1): p. 288-90.
[37]	Azadeh, N., et al., Comparison of Respiratory Pathogen Detection in Upper versus Lower Respiratory Tract Samples Using the BioFire FilmArray Respiratory Panel in the Immunocompromised Host. Can Respir J, 2018. 2018: p. 2685723.
[38]	Hughes, A. E. O., et al., Comparable Detection of Viral Pathogens in Lower Respiratory Tract Specimens With the BioFire Respiratory Panel 2 and BioFire Pneumonia Panel. J Clin Microbiol, 2020.
[39]	Schmitz, J. E. and Y. W. Tang, The GenMark ePlex ( (R)): another weapon in the syndromic arsenal for infection diagnosis. Future Microbiol, 2018. 13: p. 1697-1708.
[40]	Nijhuis, R. H. T., et al., Comparison of ePlex Respiratory Pathogen Panel with Laboratory-Developed Real-Time PCR Assays for Detection of Respiratory Pathogens. J Clin Microbiol, 2017. 55 (6): p. 1938-1945.
[41]	van Rijn, A. L., et al., Clinical implications of rapid ePlex (R) Respiratory Pathogen Panel testing compared to laboratory-developed real-time PCR. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 2018. 37 (3): p. 571-577.
[42]	Babady, N. E., et al., Multicenter Evaluation of the ePlex Respiratory Pathogen Panel for the Detection of Viral and Bacterial Respiratory Tract Pathogens in Nasopharyngeal Swabs. J Clin Microbiol, 2018. 56 (2).
[43]	Parčina, M., et al., Multicenter evaluation of the QIAstat Respiratory Panel - A new rapid highly multiplexed PCR based assay for diagnosis of acute respiratory tract infections. PLoS One, 2020. 15 (3): p. e0230183.
[44]	Lee, B. R., et al., Impact of multiplex molecular assay turn-around-time on antibiotic utilization and clinical management of hospitalized children with acute respiratory tract infections. J Clin Virol, 2019. 110: p. 11-16.
[45]	Esposito, S. and N. Principi, The role of the NxTAG (R) respiratory pathogen panel assay and other multiplex platforms in clinical practice. Expert Rev Mol Diagn, 2017. 17 (1): p. 9-17.
[46]	Simons, E., M. K. Schroth, and J. E. Gern, Analysis of tracheal secretions for rhinovirus during natural colds. Pediatr Allergy Immunol, 2005. 16 (3): p. 276-8.
[47]	Thavagnanam, S., et al., Respiratory viral infection in lower airways of asymptomatic children. Acta Paediatr, 2010. 99 (3): p. 394-8.
[48]	Makela, M. J., et al., Viruses and bacteria in the etiology of the common cold. J Clin Microbiol, 1998. 36 (2): p. 539-42.
[49]	van Benten, I., et al., Predominance of rhinovirus in the nose of symptomatic and asymptomatic infants. Pediatr Allergy Immunol, 2003. 14 (5): p. 363-70.
[50]	Fry, A. M., et al., Human rhinovirus infections in rural Thailand: epidemiological evidence for rhinovirus as both pathogen and bystander. PLoS One, 2011. 6 (3): p. e17780.
[51]	Zhao, M. C., et al., Molecular and clinical characterization of human adenovirus associated with acute respiratory tract infection in hospitalized children. J Clin Virol, 2020. 123: p. 104254.
[52]	Brandt, C. D., et al., Infections in 18,000 infants and children in a controlled study of respiratory tract disease. I. Adenovirus pathogenicity in relation to serologic type and illness syndrome. Am J Epidemiol, 1969. 90 (6): p. 484-500.
[53]	Park, J. Y., et al., Clinical Features and Courses of Adenovirus Pneumonia in Healthy Young Adults during an Outbreak among Korean Military Personnel. PLoS One, 2017. 12 (1): p. e0170592.
[54]	Schjelderup Nilsen, H. J., et al., Human adenovirus in nasopharyngeal and blood samples from children with and without respiratory tract infections. J Clin Virol, 2019. 111: p. 19-23.
[55]	Colvin, J. M., et al., Detection of viruses in young children with fever without an apparent source. Pediatrics, 2012. 130 (6): p. e1455-62.
[56]	Kalu, S. U., et al., Persistence of adenovirus nucleic acids in nasopharyngeal secretions: a diagnostic conundrum. Pediatr Infect Dis J, 2010. 29 (8): p. 746-50.
[57]	Moesker, F. M., et al., Human bocavirus infection as a cause of severe acute respiratory tract infection in children. Clin Microbiol Infect, 2015. 21 (10): p. 964 e1-8.
[58]	Schildgen, O., et al., Human bocavirus: passenger or pathogen in acute respiratory tract infections? Clin Microbiol Rev, 2008. 21 (2): p. 291-304, table of contents.
[59]	Sousa, T. T., et al., Identification of Human Bocavirus type 4 in a child asymptomatic for respiratory tract infection and acute gastroenteritis - Goiania, Goias, Brazil. Braz J Infect Dis, 2017. 21 (4): p. 472-476.
[60]	Luk, H. K. H., et al., Molecular epidemiology, evolution and phylogeny of SARS coronavirus. Infect Genet Evol, 2019. 71: p. 21-30.
[61]	Nassar, M. S., et al., Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection: epidemiology, pathogenesis and clinical characteristics. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci, 2018. 22 (15): p. 4956-4961.
[62]	Al-Tawfiq, J. A., Asymptomatic coronavirus infection: MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). Travel Med Infect Dis, 2020: p. 101608.
[63]	Wilder-Smith, A., et al., Asymptomatic SARS coronavirus infection among healthcare workers, Singapore. Emerg Infect Dis, 2005. 11 (7): p. 1142-5.
[64]	Miyashita, N., et al., Prevalence of asymptomatic infection with Chlamydia pneumoniae in subjectively healthy adults. Chest, 2001. 119 (5): p. 1416-9.
[65]	Gnarpe, J., et al., Prevalence of Mycoplasma pneumoniae in subjectively healthy individuals. Scand J Infect Dis, 1992. 24 (2): p. 161-4.
[66]	Dalpke, A., S. Zimmermann, and P. Schnitzler, Underdiagnosing of Mycoplasma pneumoniae infections as revealed by use of a respiratory multiplex PCR panel. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis, 2016. 86 (1): p. 50-2.
[67]	Truong, J. and J. V. Ashurst, Pneumocystis (Carinii) Jiroveci Pneumonia, in Stat Pearls 2020: Treasure Island (FL).
[68]	Popowitch, E. B., S. S. O'Neill, and M. B. Miller, Comparison of the Biofire FilmArray RP, Genmark eSensor RVP, Luminex xTAG RVPv1, and Luminex xTAG RVP fast multiplex assays for detection of respiratory viruses. J Clin Microbiol, 2013. 51 (5): p. 1528-33.
[69]	Brand, H. K., et al., Infection with multiple viruses is not associated with increased disease severity in children with bronchiolitis. Pediatr Pulmonol, 2012. 47 (4): p. 393-400.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Muhammad Amjad. (2021). Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases. International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 6(1), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Muhammad Amjad. Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases. Int. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2021, 6(1), 9-20. doi: 10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Muhammad Amjad. Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases. Int J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2021;6(1):9-20. doi: 10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12,
  author = {Muhammad Amjad},
  title = {Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases},
  journal = {International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology},
  volume = {6},
  number = {1},
  pages = {9-20},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijmb.20210601.12},
  abstract = {Acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) are the most common diseases worldwide and an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Upper and lower respiratory tract infections are caused by a variety of bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogens. Clinical diagnosis of respiratory tract infections is challenging because of indistinguishable symptoms. Laboratory diagnosis is performed by serology, culture, electron microscopy, and immunological antigen detection assays. These conventional diagnostic procedures are time consuming, lack sensitivity, require special laboratory setup, and well-trained staff. In the clinical laboratories, multiplex molecular nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are continuously replacing conventional diagnostic methods. This review summarizes and discusses the availability, clinical use, advantages and disadvantages of multiplex molecular methods in the detection and identification of ARTI pathogens. The multiplex molecular assays can simultaneously detect 20 or more bacterial and viral pathogens and have the advantage of increased sensitivity, specificity, and rapid turn-around time. These assays are helpful in syndromic based testing in high risk patient population, particularly those who are immunocompromised, hospitalized and/or seen in the emergency department. Limitations of multiplex molecular assays include inability to detect all the possible pathogens that can be present, not being able to differentiate between asymptomatic carriers and true infections, and sometimes results are difficult to interpret. Furthermore, additional testing may be required as these assays do not provide any information regarding antimicrobial susceptibility profile. Rapid and accurate diagnosis of respiratory tract infections leads to better treatment decisions, reduction in the further diagnostic procedures, length of hospital stay, better infection control measures, and associated healthcare costs.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases
AU  - Muhammad Amjad
Y1  - 2021/03/10
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12
T2  - International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology
JF  - International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology
JO  - International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology
SP  - 9
EP  - 20
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2578-9686
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12
AB  - Acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) are the most common diseases worldwide and an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Upper and lower respiratory tract infections are caused by a variety of bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogens. Clinical diagnosis of respiratory tract infections is challenging because of indistinguishable symptoms. Laboratory diagnosis is performed by serology, culture, electron microscopy, and immunological antigen detection assays. These conventional diagnostic procedures are time consuming, lack sensitivity, require special laboratory setup, and well-trained staff. In the clinical laboratories, multiplex molecular nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are continuously replacing conventional diagnostic methods. This review summarizes and discusses the availability, clinical use, advantages and disadvantages of multiplex molecular methods in the detection and identification of ARTI pathogens. The multiplex molecular assays can simultaneously detect 20 or more bacterial and viral pathogens and have the advantage of increased sensitivity, specificity, and rapid turn-around time. These assays are helpful in syndromic based testing in high risk patient population, particularly those who are immunocompromised, hospitalized and/or seen in the emergency department. Limitations of multiplex molecular assays include inability to detect all the possible pathogens that can be present, not being able to differentiate between asymptomatic carriers and true infections, and sometimes results are difficult to interpret. Furthermore, additional testing may be required as these assays do not provide any information regarding antimicrobial susceptibility profile. Rapid and accurate diagnosis of respiratory tract infections leads to better treatment decisions, reduction in the further diagnostic procedures, length of hospital stay, better infection control measures, and associated healthcare costs.
VL  - 6
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Muhammad Amjad

Department of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, Marshall University, Huntington, United States

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Muhammad Amjad. (2021). Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases. International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 6(1), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Muhammad Amjad. Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases. Int. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2021, 6(1), 9-20. doi: 10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Muhammad Amjad. Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases. Int J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2021;6(1):9-20. doi: 10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12,
  author = {Muhammad Amjad},
  title = {Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases},
  journal = {International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology},
  volume = {6},
  number = {1},
  pages = {9-20},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijmb.20210601.12},
  abstract = {Acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) are the most common diseases worldwide and an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Upper and lower respiratory tract infections are caused by a variety of bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogens. Clinical diagnosis of respiratory tract infections is challenging because of indistinguishable symptoms. Laboratory diagnosis is performed by serology, culture, electron microscopy, and immunological antigen detection assays. These conventional diagnostic procedures are time consuming, lack sensitivity, require special laboratory setup, and well-trained staff. In the clinical laboratories, multiplex molecular nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are continuously replacing conventional diagnostic methods. This review summarizes and discusses the availability, clinical use, advantages and disadvantages of multiplex molecular methods in the detection and identification of ARTI pathogens. The multiplex molecular assays can simultaneously detect 20 or more bacterial and viral pathogens and have the advantage of increased sensitivity, specificity, and rapid turn-around time. These assays are helpful in syndromic based testing in high risk patient population, particularly those who are immunocompromised, hospitalized and/or seen in the emergency department. Limitations of multiplex molecular assays include inability to detect all the possible pathogens that can be present, not being able to differentiate between asymptomatic carriers and true infections, and sometimes results are difficult to interpret. Furthermore, additional testing may be required as these assays do not provide any information regarding antimicrobial susceptibility profile. Rapid and accurate diagnosis of respiratory tract infections leads to better treatment decisions, reduction in the further diagnostic procedures, length of hospital stay, better infection control measures, and associated healthcare costs.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases
AU  - Muhammad Amjad
Y1  - 2021/03/10
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12
T2  - International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology
JF  - International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology
JO  - International Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology
SP  - 9
EP  - 20
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2578-9686
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmb.20210601.12
AB  - Acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) are the most common diseases worldwide and an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Upper and lower respiratory tract infections are caused by a variety of bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogens. Clinical diagnosis of respiratory tract infections is challenging because of indistinguishable symptoms. Laboratory diagnosis is performed by serology, culture, electron microscopy, and immunological antigen detection assays. These conventional diagnostic procedures are time consuming, lack sensitivity, require special laboratory setup, and well-trained staff. In the clinical laboratories, multiplex molecular nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are continuously replacing conventional diagnostic methods. This review summarizes and discusses the availability, clinical use, advantages and disadvantages of multiplex molecular methods in the detection and identification of ARTI pathogens. The multiplex molecular assays can simultaneously detect 20 or more bacterial and viral pathogens and have the advantage of increased sensitivity, specificity, and rapid turn-around time. These assays are helpful in syndromic based testing in high risk patient population, particularly those who are immunocompromised, hospitalized and/or seen in the emergency department. Limitations of multiplex molecular assays include inability to detect all the possible pathogens that can be present, not being able to differentiate between asymptomatic carriers and true infections, and sometimes results are difficult to interpret. Furthermore, additional testing may be required as these assays do not provide any information regarding antimicrobial susceptibility profile. Rapid and accurate diagnosis of respiratory tract infections leads to better treatment decisions, reduction in the further diagnostic procedures, length of hospital stay, better infection control measures, and associated healthcare costs.
VL  - 6
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download