Comparison of a new rapid test (TestPack Rotavirus) with standard enzyme immunoassay and electron microscopy for the detection of rotavirus in symptomatic hospitalized children

Abstract

We compared a new, rapid, qualitative test for rotavirus (TestPack Rotavirus; Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, Ill.) with another enzyme immunoassay (Pathfinder Rotavirus; Kallestad Laboratories, Inc., Austin, Tex.) and electron microscopy to determine its clinical utility in a population of symptomatic hospitalized children. In the first part of the study, 100 frozen stool samples were tested. The results after resolution with a blocking reagent showed a sensitivity of only 50% and a specificity of 88% for TestPack Rotavirus. In the second part of the study, we tested TestPack Rotavirus on 100 fresh, unfrozen samples. The results (sensitivity/specificity) were as follows: TestPack Rotavirus, 95/90%; Pathfinder Rotavirus, 84/98%; direct electron microscopy, 63/100%. Although it was not as sensitive or specific as immune electron microscopy, TestPack Rotavirus was more sensitive than direct electron microscopy or Kallestad Pathfinder Rotavirus. TestPack Rotavirus represents a rapid, qualitative method for the detection of rotavirus in stools of symptomatic children.

Occurrence of nonspecific reactions among stool specimens tested by the Abbott TestPack rotavirus enzyme immunoassay

“…In our hands, TestPack failed to approach the near-perfect test specifications reported by others (3,15). However, our results showing an 83% specificity are more in agreement with those of workers reporting a specificity of 90% (2). Two of our il discordant specimens were obtained from 1987-1988 frozen stock.…”

“…The sensitivity of the assay has been found to be satisfactory for the diagnosis of rotavirus gastroenteritis. However, the specificity of TestPack, at selected geographic locations, has been shown to vary from 90 to 100% (2,3,15). The purpose of this study was to investigate the performance of the TestPack in the Long Island, N.Y., area, to identify any recrementitious variability in the specificity of the test.…”

Comparison of Polymerase Chain Reaction and Dot Hybridization with Enzyme‐Linked Immunoassay, Virological Examination and Polyacrylamide Gel Electrophoresis for the Detection of Porcine Rotavirus in Faecal Specimens

“…Rapid diagnosis of rotaviral infections is based on revealing the presence of rotaviral particles, their antigens or dsRNA in the clinical material samples at the early stage of infection. For its advantage, numerous methods were worked out, such as immunoenzymatic test using polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies (Dennehy et al, 1988;Pacini et al, 1988;Thomas et al, 1988;Brooks et al, 1989;Kok and Burrell 1989), agglutination using latex (Hughes et al, 1984), molecular hybridization (Arens and Swierkosz, 1989;Olive and Sethi, 1989), electrophoresis in polyacrylamide gel (Herring et al, 1982), the technique of direct electron microscopy as well as applying immunological aggregation of the virus (Benfield et al, 1984;Wu et al 1990) and recently RT-PCR technique (Gouvea et al, 1990;Wilde et al, 1990). Each of the above mentioned methods has its advantages and disadvantages.…”

Evaluación de cuatro métodos para detección de rotavirus en deposiciones en niños chilenos

“…La electroforesis de ARN viral requiere de un numero mayor de particulas virales para obtener un resultado positive 7 ' 9 (10 7 -10 11 parliculas por ml de deposici6n versus 10 5 requcridas por ELISA o microscopia electronica); por otro lado, el ARN viral es labil y susceptible a degradaci6n por ARN asas normalmente presentes en muestras bio!6gicas. En relacion al RV-Test Pack, se ha informado que la sensibilidad disminuye cuando la determina-ci6n se realiza con muestras que ban sido sometidas a congelacidn 11 .…”

“…La prueba de ELISA presento" 3 falsos positives (negatives por prueba confirmatoria y por microscopfa elcctr6nica) los que probablemente se deben a reaccion cruzada con otros antfgenos 29 " 3 '; el RV-Test Pack tuvo un falso positive, de reac-ci6n debil, fenomcno que ha side atribuido a la presencia de anticuerpos de tipo IgM u otras protcinas (proteinas de S. aureits* factor reumatoide, etc.) 11 .…”