Laboratory diagnosis of viral infection

Peaper, David R.; Landry, Marie L.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-53488-0.00005-5

Cited by 31 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 117 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Human embryonic lung fibroblasts and primary monkey kidney, A549, and BGMK cells are generally used for enterovirus isolation, and these produce CPE within 5 days (62). Compared to use of a single cell type, coculturing these cells has enhanced the possibility of virus isolation (63,64). Compared with wild-type BGMK cells, BGMK-hDAF, a genetically engineered cell line expressing human decay-accelerating factor (hDAF) and with an expanded host range, can enhance enterovirus detection (64,65).…”

Section: Improved Virus Isolationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Compared to use of a single cell type, coculturing these cells has enhanced the possibility of virus isolation (63,64). Compared with wild-type BGMK cells, BGMK-hDAF, a genetically engineered cell line expressing human decay-accelerating factor (hDAF) and with an expanded host range, can enhance enterovirus detection (64,65). The sensitivity of these cell lines was further increased by coculturing BGMK-hDAF with CaCo-2 (BGMK-hDAF/CaCo-2 [marketed as Super E-Mix cell; Diagnostic Hybrid Inc.]) (65).…”

Section: Improved Virus Isolationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Virological and Immunological Outcomes of Coinfections

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYCoinfections involving viruses are being recognized to influence the disease pattern that occurs relative to that with single infection. Classically, we usually think of a clinical syndrome as the consequence of infection by a single virus that is isolated from clinical specimens. However, this biased laboratory approach omits detection of additional agents that could be contributing to the clinical outcome, including novel agents not usually considered pathogens. The presence of an additional agent may also interfere with the targeted isolation of a known virus. Viral interference, a phenomenon where one virus competitively suppresses replication of other coinfecting viruses, is the most common outcome of viral coinfections. In addition, coinfections can modulate virus virulence and cell death, thereby altering disease severity and epidemiology. Immunity to primary virus infection can also modulate immune responses to subsequent secondary infections. In this review, various virological mechanisms that determine viral persistence/exclusion during coinfections are discussed, and insights into the isolation/detection of multiple viruses are provided. We also discuss features of heterologous infections that impact the pattern of immune responsiveness that develops.

show abstract

Section: Improved Virus Isolationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Improved Virus Isolationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Virological and Immunological Outcomes of Coinfections

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Samples positive by screening EIA undergo confirmatory testing, e.g., with a plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT), in which serial dilutions of patient sample are mixed with virus then incubated with cell culture to look for plaque formation. 13 In contrast to IgM, IgG does cross the blood-brain barrier, so diagnosis of chronic or reactivated infections requires demonstration of an elevated CSF:serum IgG ratio, normalized to the CSF:serum ratio of albumin. Testing antibody responses from the serum can also aid in diagnosis, but must be interpreted carefully, since prior vaccination or treatment with blood products can lead to false-positive results.…”

Section: Detection Of Immune Response By Serologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Testing in Central Nervous System Infection

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several key points should guide providers managing a patient with suspected CNS infection. The first is the importance of developing a plan for the diagnostic workup. Clinicians are recommended to first test for the most likely and Keywords ► meningitis ► encephalitis ► diagnostic ► metagenomic sequencing AbstractPatients with central nervous system (CNS) infection experience very high levels of morbidity and mortality, in part because of the many challenges inherent to the diagnosis of CNS infection and identification of a causative pathogen. The clinical presentation of CNS infection is nonspecific, so clinicians must often order and interpret many diagnostic tests in parallel. This can be a daunting task given the large number of potential pathogens and the availability of different testing modalities. Here, we review traditional diagnostic techniques including Gram stain and culture, serology, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). We highlight which of these are recommended for the pathogens most commonly tested among U.S. patients with suspected CNS infection. Finally, we describe the newer broadrange diagnostic approaches, multiplex PCR and metagenomic sequencing, which are increasingly used in clinical practice.This document was downloaded for personal use only. Unauthorized distribution is strictly prohibited.• What pathogen is being interrogated;• How to test for it (e.g., serology vs. PCR);• Where to look (e.g., CSF vs. blood);• When to test (e.g., need for paired acute/convalescent sera).Another important consideration is the turnaround time between ordering a test and receiving its results, since clinical decisions often need to be made empirically while awaiting test results. In general, PCR tests are rapid and often available in-house, while specialized serology tests may only be available at reference laboratories. However, there is substantial variation between clinical microbiology laboratories, so close communication with laboratory personnel is essential. Detection of Immune Response by SerologySerological tests are widely used in the diagnosis of CNS infections, particularly for pathogens present at low levels or for brief periods of time, and for diseases whose manifestations are primarily mediated by the host antibody response.

show abstract

“…However, the differential diagnosis can be difficult due to nonspecific clinical presentation and symptoms [ 2 ], particularly in premorbid patients with, for example, bronchial asthma. Historically, examination of clinical symptoms in combination with virus isolation, serological tests, imaging, and chest radiography [ 3 ] have served as mainstays of viral detection [ 4 ]. Later, chest computed tomography [ 5 ], antibody staining and detection methods complemented with immune assays paved the way for better diagnostics but still lacked the specificity and sensitivity required for accurate detection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Measurements of Inflammatory Biomarkers Be Used to Spot Respiratory Viral Infections?

Sinha

Lutter

Dekker

et al. 2020

Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate detection of human respiratory viral infections is highly topical. We investigated how strongly inflammatory biomarkers (FeNO, eosinophils, neutrophils, and cytokines in nasal lavage fluid) and lung function parameters change upon rhinovirus 16 infection, in order to explore their potential use for infection detection. To this end, within a longitudinal cohort study, healthy and mildly asthmatic volunteers were experimentally inoculated with rhinovirus 16, and time series of these parameters/biomarkers were systematically recorded and compared between the pre- and post-infection phases of the study, which lasted two months and one month, respectively. We found that the parameters’/biomarkers’ ability to discriminate between the infected and the uninfected state varied over the observation time period. Consistently over time, the concentration of cytokines, in nasal lavage fluid, showed moderate to very good discrimination performance, thereby qualifying for disease progression monitoring, whereas lung function and FeNO, while quickly and non-invasively measurable using cheap portable devices (e.g., at airports), performed poorly.

show abstract

Laboratory diagnosis of viral infection

Cited by 31 publications

References 117 publications

Virological and Immunological Outcomes of Coinfections

Virological and Immunological Outcomes of Coinfections

Diagnostic Testing in Central Nervous System Infection

Can Measurements of Inflammatory Biomarkers Be Used to Spot Respiratory Viral Infections?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About