BackgroundCommercial immunoassays that detect IgG and IgM directed toward VCA and IgG EBNA are used in combination to assess EBV immune status. However, this strategy does not always confirm/exclude recent/past EBV infection or absence of immunity. ObjectivesThe aim of our study was to perform complementary investigations on samples with atypical EBV serological profiles, in order to identify the clinical situation they correspond to. Study designEBV serology was performed using EBV VCA IgM/IgG and EBNA IgG LXL® DiaSorin assay. Complementary investigations included ELISA IgM VCA, immunoblots, CMV IgM/IgG and CMV IgG avidity, and EBV PCR. ResultsIn our study, 12810 EBV serological results were analyzed, and 3580 atypical profiles were detected (28 %). Among these latter, isolated VCA IgG represented 42.9 %, the three positive markers accounted for 29.1 %, isolated EBNA IgG represented 18.5 %, isolated VCA IgM accounted for 6.4 % and positive VCA IgM & positive EBNA IgG represented 3.1 %. VCA IgG detected alone were specific in 100 % cases and EBNA IgG detected alone were specific in 91.7 % cases. VCA IgM detected alone were false positive or due to a cross reaction with CMV in 52.8 % cases. The pattern positive VCA IgM and positive EBNA IgG correspond to a false positive in VCA IgM, EBNA IgG or both in 83.4 % cases. Positive EBV VCA IgM/IgG and EBNA IgG were unreliable to detect active EBV infection in 66.7 % cases. DiscussionAtypical EBV serological profiles may correspond to several clinical situations and complementary investigations allow to determine the immune status in more than 98.5 % cases.