Comparison of three enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays and a direct fluorescent-antibody test for detection of respiratory syncytial virus antigen

Krilov, Leonard R.; Marcoux, Loretta; Isenberg, Henry D.

doi:10.1128/jcm.26.2.377-379.1988

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The significant morbidity and mortality associated with RSV infections, particularly in high-risk individuals, makes specific and rapid diagnosis imperative. Over the past years, several commercial vendors have addressed this need by introducing indirect fluorescent-antibody tests and enzymelinked immunosorbent assays which provide results in hours rather than in the days associated with traditional cell culture techniques (12). Particularly since the advent of the antiviral agent ribavirin, still more rapid tests have been introduced, including the DFA test, which can be performed in less than 1 h (6, 8; D. C. Halstead, Clin.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of five methods for respiratory syncytial virus detection

1990

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A total of 117 nasal aspirates were cultured for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and tested for RSV antigen by a direct fluorescent-antibody (DFA) test (Bartels Immunodiagnostic Supplies, Inc., Bellevue, Wash.), the Directigen enzyme immunoassay (EIA; Becton Dickinson Microbiology Systems, Cockeysville, Md.), the TestPack ELA (Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, Ill.), and RSV EIA (Abbott). Agreement of two of five methods or a positive RSV culture were required to validate a result. A total of 57 of 117 (48.7%) specimens were culture positive in HEp-2 cells, A549 cells, or both. A total of 5 of 117 (4.3%) additional specimens met the criteria of a positive specimen; i.e., 62 of 117 (53.0%) specimens were positive. Results obtained from 77 of 117 (65.8%) specimens were concordant for all five methods. The sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative predictive values for the culture and DFA methods were 91.9, 100, 100, and 91.7% and 91.9, 96.4, 96.6, and 91.4%, respectively. The sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative predictive values for the three EIA procedures,

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of five methods for respiratory syncytial virus detection

1990

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Isolation in cell culture, direct immunofluorescence (IF), and enzyme immunoassays are currently the most common methods used for the identification of RSV (3,4,12,13,15,19). These procedures require laboratory support to various degrees.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of directigen RSV with viral isolation and direct immunofluorescence for the identification of respiratory syncytial virus

et al. 1990

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An enzyme immunoassay membrane test (Directigen RSV) for the detection of respiratory syncytial virus in clinical specimens was compared prospectively with isolation in cell culture and direct immunofluorescence (IF). A total of 315 nasopharyngeal wash specimens from pediatric patients were examined. Directigen RSV was 86.1% sensitive and 91.3% specific for specimens positive by isolation in cell culture and/or IF, with 88.6% agreement. The false-positive rate was 16%; 2 of 20 specimens giving false-positive reactions by Directigen RSV were true-positives by blocking assay. Twenty-seven specimens (8.5%) whose results were initially uninterpretable by Directigen RSV due to filtration difficulties were diluted and upon retesting produced acceptable results. Sixty-three viral isolates and/or IF identifications of virus antigens representing seven virus groups other than respiratory syncytial virus were also found; cross-reactions between Directigen RSV and other viruses were not observed. Directigen RSV will be useful as an immediate procedure and in facilities lacking a comprehensive virology laboratory.

show abstract

Stability of respiratory syncytial virus antigen due to buffer treatment for direct detection in nasopharyngeal specimens with enzyme immunoassay

Döller

Schuy

1993

Clinical Laboratory Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We developed an enzyme immunoassay (direct EIA; Enzygnost RSV[Ag]) for the direct detection of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) antigen in nasopharyngeal specimens (NPS). The test procedure is the same as our recently described direct EIA for detection of influenza A and B virus antigens in NPS. For practical purposes it is of advantage to differentiate respiratory viruses on the same microtitration plate in the same run. The test shows no limitations by sample consistency, and results are obtained within 4 hr. In contrast to other test systems, sonification is not necessary. This is due to the sample buffer STD. We studied the influence of sample buffer STD on the stability of RSV (strain Long) antigen at different temperatures over a period of 7 days. PBS-BSA-buffer served as control. The treatment and storage of RSV (strain Long) with sample buffer STD at room temperature or at 4 degrees C showed no decrease of antigen detectability. The antigen is very stable in contrast to the storage of RSV (strain Long) in PBS-BSA buffer during the observation period of 7 days. Consequently, when NPS are stored in sample buffer STD, results of direct EIA are independent from the time of transport and temperature within 7 days. Thirty-eight NPS from infants with confirmed RSV infection were investigated. Confirmation was performed by virus isolation (n = 29) or with commercially available enzyme immunoassays or immunofluorescence test (n = 9). The direct EIA showed a specificity of 99.3% (n = 140) and a sensitivity of 95% (n = 38).

show abstract

Comparison of three enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays and a direct fluorescent-antibody test for detection of respiratory syncytial virus antigen

Cited by 8 publications

References 14 publications

Evaluation of five methods for respiratory syncytial virus detection

Evaluation of five methods for respiratory syncytial virus detection

Comparison of directigen RSV with viral isolation and direct immunofluorescence for the identification of respiratory syncytial virus

Stability of respiratory syncytial virus antigen due to buffer treatment for direct detection in nasopharyngeal specimens with enzyme immunoassay

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About