SESSION TITLE: Monday Fellow Case Report Posters SESSION TYPE: Fellow Case Report Posters PRESENTED ON: 10/21/2019 02:30 PM - 03:15 PM INTRODUCTION: Varicella pneumonia is a rare but serious infection caused by Varicella Zoster virus (VZV). Diagnosis is attained by clinical presentation, radiologic findings & is aided by detection of VZV in respiratory secretions by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). We present a diagnostic dilemma when two tests have a discrepancy. CASE PRESENTATION: A 41 year old female presented with left upper quadrant (LUQ) abdominal pain, hypotension, melena & somnolence which prompted intubation. She had medical history of end stage liver disease due to alcoholic cirrhosis, esophageal varices, refractory ascites & encephalopathy. Endoscopy showed varices & small bowel ulcer; & paracentesis ruled out bacterial peritonitis. After treatment with octreotide, nexium & prophylactic ceftriaxone; she was was successfully extubated. 3 days later, she developed a new, vesicular, dermatomal rash of shingles on LUQ. This was followed by new extensive multifocal infiltrates, crazy paving pattern & diffuse ground glass opacities on chest imaging (Figure) along with hypoxic respiratory failure which warranted re-intubation. A bronchoscopy was done which showed thick white secretions on bronchial washing (BW) & cloudy fluid on bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) of right middle lobe & left upper-lingular segment. VZV PCR resulted positive on BW but negative on BAL. Patient was started on Varicella-Zoster immune globulin (VZIG) and acyclovir based on clinical presentation and radiologic features which led to clinical improvement. DISCUSSION: Varicella pneumonia can manifest 1-6 days after onset of the typical rash & is highly infectious with a secondary attack rate of > 90%. In the presence of clinical features of VZV infection, the diagnosis is mediated by chest imaging showing nodular or interstitial pneumonitis with ground glass opacities. Molecular diagnostic assays using PCR are often employed and have sensitivity as high as 96% for detection of VZV (1). However, it can be limited by false positive rate due to contamination and depends on the methodology (2) as well as specimen source although BAL has high sensitivity (3). Our patient developed respiratory failure with radiologic findings shortly after typical zoster rash. Despite adequate sampling, there was a discrepancy in the result obtained from BAL and BW. A comparison of these two hasn’t been studied yet in respect to VZV as well as other common pathogens. We favored to treat the patient due to detection of VZV on BW & the clinical presentation. VZIG administration within 72 hours of exposure is highly efficacious for disease prevention in immunocompromised along with intravenous acyclovir for 7-10 days and has led to overall decline in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Although VZV DNA detection by PCR is helpful in diagnosing VZV pneumonia, there is no consensus data on its utility on BW in comparison to BAL. The paucity of VZV pneumonia is a hindrance for more extensive studies. Reference #1: Mirouse A et al. Severe varicella-zoster virus pneumonia: a multicenter cohort study. Critical Care. 2017 Dec;21(1):137 Reference #2: Schmutzhard J, Riedel HM, Wirgart BZ, Grillner L. Detection of herpes simplex virus type 1, herpes simplex virus type 2 and varicella-zoster virus in skin lesions. Comparison of real-time PCR, nested PCR and virus isolation. Journal of clinical virology. 2004 Feb 1;29(2):120-6 Reference #3: Stránská R, Schuurman R, de Vos M, van Loon AM. Routine use of a highly automated and internally controlled real-time PCR assay for the diagnosis of herpes simplex and varicella-zoster virus infections. Journal of Clinical Virology. 2004 May 1;30(1):39-44 DISCLOSURES: No relevant relationships by Enambir Josan, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Supriya Singh, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Yasir Tarabichi, source=Web Response