Comparative study of Legiolert with ISO 11731-1998 standard method-conclusions from a Public Health Laboratory

Abstract

Background: Legionella pneumophila (L. pneumophila) is responsible for 96% of Legionnaires' disease (LD) and 10% of all worldwide pneumonia cases. Legiolert™, a liquid culture method for most probable number (MPN) enumeration of L. pneumophila, was developed by IDEXX Laboratories. The method detects all serogroups of L. pneumophila in potable and non-potable water samples.

Objective: The goal of this study is to establish that Legiolert is a suitable alternative method to meet testing requirements in Spain for the enumeration of Legionella in water samples.

Methodology: The laboratory analyzed 118 environmental water samples from the Barcelona region (56 potable and 62 non-potable) in parallel by the Standard method for detection and enumeration of Legionella (ISO 11731:1998) and by Legiolert. Comparison of the recovery of the alternative method (Legiolert) and the Standard was made using ISO 17994:2014 and McNemar's binomial test statistical methods.

Results: 44 samples were positive for Legionella (36 potable and 8 non-potable). Legiolert and the Standard method detected a similar percentage of positive samples, with Legiolert being slightly higher (31 vs 30%) and detecting higher concentrations of Legionella within the samples. ISO 17994:2014 analysis of the potable water samples found Legiolert was more sensitive than the Standard at detecting Legionella, even when complete Legionella species (L. spp.) results were considered for both methods. The two methods also demonstrated equivalent detection of L. spp. according to the McNemar's test. The comparison is significantly more in favor of Legiolert when only L. pneumophila results are considered. Each confirmation run with material extracted from positive Legiolert wells contained L. pneumophila, giving the method a specificity of 100%. Although statistical results for non-potable waters are not included because of the low number of samples, the two methods trended towards equivalence.

Conclusions: Relative to the Standard method, Legiolert has a greater sensitivity and selectivity, and appears to have higher recovery for L. pneumophila, and equivalent recovery when L. spp. is included in the comparison. Legiolert also has high specificity. The procedural advantages of Legiolert allow laboratories to save on resources, costs, and time and consequently to test more frequently. In conclusion, the study finds IDEXX Legiolert a suitable alternative to ISO 11731:1998.

Keywords: Drinking water; ISO 11731-1998; Legiolert; Legionella pneumophila; Non-drinking water; Standard method.