1987
DOI: 10.1016/0166-0934(87)90028-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detection of CMV in urine: comparison between DNA-DNA hybridization, virus isolation, and immunoelectron microscopy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1988
1988
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The dot blot hybridization has been demonstrated to be a reliable method for testing clinical specimens for the presence of H CMV (Chou & Merigan, 1983 ;Schuster et al, 1986;Virtanen et al, 1984;Vonsover et al, 1987). Southern blot hybridizations are more sensitive and allow more detailed studies on HCMV infection (Adler, 1985;Rfiger & Fleckenstein, 1985;Spector et al, 1985).…”
Section: Diagnostic Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The dot blot hybridization has been demonstrated to be a reliable method for testing clinical specimens for the presence of H CMV (Chou & Merigan, 1983 ;Schuster et al, 1986;Virtanen et al, 1984;Vonsover et al, 1987). Southern blot hybridizations are more sensitive and allow more detailed studies on HCMV infection (Adler, 1985;Rfiger & Fleckenstein, 1985;Spector et al, 1985).…”
Section: Diagnostic Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Antibodies were detected by clumping test [15] and by solidphase immune electron microscopy (SPIEM), as described by Vonsover et al [16]. Both methods involve incubation of antibodies with the virus and visualization of the resulting agglutination (clumping) of virions by EM.…”
Section: Purification O F Viral Particlesmentioning
confidence: 99%