Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, March 2004, p. 1254-1256, Vol. 42, No. 3
0095-1137/04/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.3.1254-1256.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Baylor College of Medicine and The Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas
Received 21 September 2003/ Returned for modification 24 October 2003/ Accepted 25 November 2003
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
A retrospective review of the microbiology laboratory database at The Methodist Hospital, Houston, Tex., identified 205 adult inpatients who had undergone one to three FLTs from October 2000 through April 2001. Discharge codes were retrieved. Patients were divided into two groups based on their gastrointestinal diagnoses: group 1 consisted of patients who were likely to have a breach in the colonic mucosa (any infectious or inflammatory condition, blood in the stool, or acute vascular insufficiency), and group 2 consisted of patients who were unlikely to have a breach in the colonic mucosa (no lower gastrointestinal discharge diagnosis, abdominal pain, colostomy, constipation, diarrhea, diverticulosis, hemorrhoids, history of colonic malignancy, impaction, incontinence, irritable bowel syndrome, neoplasm, obstruction, paralytic ileus, polyps, or rectal prolapse). Patients with multiple gastrointestinal diagnoses were classified within group 1 if any diagnosis involved a probable colonic mucosal breach.
Samples were examined within 1 h of receipt by the laboratory. We used Spot Test methylene blue stain (Loeffler, Difco, Detroit, Mich.) per the standard protocol, without additional controls. Only neutrophils with unequivocal segmented nuclei were counted. Test results were graded on the basis of the number of neutrophils per high-power field (HPF) as follows: "many" indicated >10 neutrophils, "moderate" indicated 5 to 10 neutrophils, "occasional" indicated 2 to 4 neutrophils, "few" indicated 1 neutrophil, "rare" indicated <1 neutrophil, and "none" indicated 0 neutrophils/HPF. Multiple specimens from the same patient were collected 24 h apart for up to 7 days; the result with the most fecal leukocytes was used for calculations.
Inpatients (n = 205) were divided into group 1 (n = 72) and group 2 (n = 133) (Table 1). Using a cutoff of <1 neutrophil/HPF (Fig. 1A) rather than >1 neutrophil/HPF (Fig. 1B) affected FLT performance. The levels of agreement between the FLT results for multiple specimens from the same patient (n = 31) were 75% (24 patients with two tests) and 57% (7 patients with three tests), FLT agreement being defined as a change in result from the original interpretation of less than two grading categories. Repeat testing demonstrated that only five patients (16%) were correctly reclassified by eventual positive FLT. Of the patients known to have infectious gastroenteritis (n = 25), 32% had a positive FLT result, including those with C. difficile infection (n = 20; 5 were positive [25%]), viral enteritis (n = 3; 2 were positive), unspecified bacterial enteritis (n = 1; positive), and intestinal tuberculosis (n = 1; negative). Interestingly, the patient with both Giardia lamblia and C. difficile had no detectable fecal leukocytes. There was no statistical difference in the FLT results for patients with infectious or noninfectious gastroenteritis. Of patients with blood in the stool, 54% (7 of 13) had a negative FLT result. Unexpected negative FLT results were also found with patients with endoscopy-proven colonic ulceration (n = 1), appendicitis (n = 1), and anal abscess or fissure (n = 1). No patients with gastrointestinal tumors (n = 8) exhibited fecal leukocytes. Positive FLT results were found for three of four patients with acute intestinal vascular insufficiency and only one of three patients with ulcerative colitis; this strong association between acute vascular insufficiency and the presence of fecal leukocytes was noted but not further characterized. Conversely, 6 of 74 patients (8%) had positive FLT results without gastrointestinal pathology.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. Results of FLTa
|
![]() View larger version (21K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Analysis of cutoff values for FLT. (A) Classification of patients with and without a breach in the colonic mucosa in relation to FLT results using a cutoff of <1 neutrophil/HPF as an indication of positivity. The sensitivity was 39%, the specificity was 81%, and the PPV was 53%. (B) Classification of patients with and without a breach in the colonic mucosa in relation to FLT results using a cutoff of >1 neutrophil/HPF as an indication of positivity. The sensitivity was 28%, the specificity was 92%, the PPV was 67%, and the NPV was 70%.
|
Studies investigating FLT in conjunction with occult blood screening (guaiac testing) for detection of invasive bacterial enteritis have not found improved sensitivity (6, 8, 12). We also found no correlation between FLT, occult blood screening, and bacterial enteritis. Similarly, guaiac testing is an effective screening test for colon cancer, but no fecal leukocytes were found in patients with enteric neoplasm (n = 8). Therefore, it appears that these two tests detect somewhat different physiological processes. Until this difference is clarified, it may be misleading to compare FLT or tests for fecal leukocyte markers to guaiac testing when assessing the performance of FLT, which is a currently accepted practice (7). Our results demonstrate that, even in conjunction with guaiac testing, FLT cannot distinguish between infectious gastroenteritis and noninfectious gastroenteritis in inpatients and should not be used for this purpose. In summary, a test with even an optimized cutoff value of >1 neutrophil/HPF detected breached colonic mucosae only 20% more often than a coin toss (PPV, 67%; NPV, 70%), and repeat testing was not helpful in most cases (82%).
|
|
|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»