This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Blanco, S.
Right arrow Articles by Domínguez, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Blanco, S.
Right arrow Articles by Domínguez, J.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, September 2004, p. 4410, Vol. 42, No. 9
0095-1137/04/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.9.4410.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Centrifugal Ultrafiltration Method for Rapid Concentration of Legionella pneumophila Urinary Antigen


arrow
LETTER
 
Detection of Legionella pneumophila antigen in urine by enzyme immunoassay (EIA) or by immunochromatographic testing (ICT) has proven rapid, sensitive, and specific for diagnosing legionellosis (2, 3, 5, 6). Although it requires added processing time, the use of concentrated urine (CU) obtained by selective ultrafiltration significantly improves the sensitivity (1) of antigen detection. We assessed the utility of rapid antigen concentration by centrifugal ultrafiltration (Amicon Ultra-4; Millipore Corporation, Bedford, Mass.) and compared it to passive ultrafiltration (Urifil-10; Millipore Corporation).

We tested 35 patients with confirmed L. pneumophila infection. Diagnosis was achieved by detection of antigen by the EIA method (Binax, Portland, Maine) using 25-fold CU obtained by passive ultrafiltration. In addition, 35 patients with confirmed pneumonia of other etiologies (15 Streptococcus pneumoniae infections, 15 Mycoplasma pneumoniae infections, and 5 Chlamydia pneumoniae infections) and 15 patients with urinary tract infections (10 Escherichia coli infections, 1 Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection, 2 Proteus mirabilis infections, and 1 Klebsiella pneumoniae infection) were examined. These patients were all negative when tested as outlined above.

Prior to the concentration step, all urine samples were initially boiled for 5 min and then centrifuged at 1,000 x g for 15 min to reduce nonspecific reactions (4). Using the passive ultrafiltration method, 4 ml of urine was introduced into a device equipped with an ultrafiltration membrane. This membrane is permanently sealed into the housing, and the back membrane is in contact with an absorbent pad. Water and small molecules penetrate the membrane as a consequence of the absorbent pad, while the Legionella antigen cannot cross the membrane and is progressively concentrated. The centrifugal device combines a low-binding ultrafiltration membrane with a vertical housing. Water and small molecules penetrate the membrane as a consequence of centrifugation, while Legionella antigen cannot cross the membrane and is concentrated. Four ml of each nonconcentrated urine sample was centrifuged to 3,000 x g (MSE Mistral 2000; Sanyo Gallenkap PLC, Middlesex, United Kingdom) for 15 min. When necessary, additional centrifugation processes of 5 min each were used until the 25-fold concentration was obtained.

Initially, all urine samples were concentrated by passive ultrafiltration, and the Legionella antigen was detected by EIA. Then, the urine samples were frozen at –80°C for 3 to 12 months. Afterwards, the urine samples were thawed and concentrated by centrifugal ultrafiltration, and the antigen was detected by ICT. The ICT results for CU obtained by centrifugal ultrafiltration were compared with the previous result obtained by the EIA for CU obtained by passive ultrafiltration. The EIA and ICT were previously compared, and highly comparable results were obtained (2).

The results obtained by using CU processed by centrifugal ultrafiltration were identical to those obtained by using CU processed by passive ultrafiltration for the 35 urine samples with a Legionella diagnosis. The ratios obtained by the EIA method ranged between 4.49 and 41.9 (mean, 16.53; SD, 9.45). Centrifugal concentration did not represent a decrease in the sensitivity of the antigen detection, including samples with a low antigenic content. All CU samples obtained by centrifugal ultrafiltration from the non-Legionella patient specimens were negative by ICT.

The overall agreement between both concentration methods was 100%. The time needed to concentrate urine by passive ultrafiltration was between 1 and 3 h, depending on the physical characteristics of each specimen. Some specimens took over 6 h to reach a concentration of 25-fold. In contrast, the time required in the centrifugal ultrafiltration was only 15 min. A few samples did require an additional 5-min centrifugation step to obtain the desired concentration. In conclusion, centrifugal ultrafiltration is a valid methodology for carrying out L. pneumophila antigen concentration without decreasing the ICT test sensitivity or specificity.


arrow
REFERENCES
 
    1
  1. Domínguez, J. A., J. M. Manterola, R. Blavia, N. Sopena, F. J. Belda, E. Padilla, M. Giménez, M. Sabrià, J. Morera, and V. Ausina. 1996. Detection of Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 antigen in nonconcentrated urine and urine concentrated by selective ultrafiltration. J. Clin. Microbiol. 34:2334-2336.[Abstract]
    2. 2
  2. Domínguez, J., N. Galí, L. Matas, P. Pedroso, A. Hernández, E. Padilla, and V. Ausina. 1999. Evaluation of a rapid immunochromatographic assay for the detection of Legionella antigen in urine samples. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 18:896-898.[CrossRef][Medline]
    3. 3
  3. Domínguez, J., N. Galí, S. Blanco, P. Pedroso, C. Prat, L. Matas, and V. Ausina. 2001. Assessment of a new test to detect Legionella urinary antigen for the diagnosis of Legionnaire's disease. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 41:199-203.[CrossRef][Medline]
    4. 4
  4. Doskeland, S., and B. P. Berdal. 1980. Bacterial antigen detection in body fluids: methods for rapid antigen concentration and reduction of nonspecific reactions. J. Clin. Microbiol. 11:380-384.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    5. 5
  5. Harrison, T. G., and N. Doshi. 2001. Evaluation of the Bartels Legionella Urinary Antigen enzyme immunoassay. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 20:738-740.[CrossRef][Medline]
    6. 6
  6. Helbig, J. H., S. A. Uldum, P. C. Lück, and T. G. Harrison. 2001. Detection of Legionella pneumophila antigen in urine samples by the BinaxNOW immunochromatographic assay and comparison with both Binax Legionella Urinary Enzyme Immunoassay (EIA) and Biotest Legionella Urin Antigen EIA. J. Med. Microbiol. 50:509-516.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
S. Blanco
C. Prat
M. A. Pallarés
L. Matas
J. Domínguez*
Servei de Microbiologia
Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol
Carretera del Canyet s/n
08916 Badalona, Barcelona, Spain

* Phone: 34 93 497 88 94
Fax: 34 93 497 88 95
E-mail: jadoming{at}ns.hugtip.scs.es

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, September 2004, p. 4410, Vol. 42, No. 9
0095-1137/04/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.9.4410.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Blanco, S.
Right arrow Articles by Domínguez, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Blanco, S.
Right arrow Articles by Domínguez, J.

Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»