2013
DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2013(09)05
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of the direct fluorescence assay and real-time polymerase chain reaction for the detection of influenza virus A and B in immunocompromised patients

Abstract: OBJECTIVE:This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of two methods for the detection of influenza virus in immunocompromised transplant patients.METHODS:A total of 475 respiratory samples, 236 from patients in a hematopoietic stem cell transplantation program and 239 from kidney transplant patients, were analyzed by a direct fluorescence assay and the Centers for Disease Control real-time polymerase chain reaction protocol for influenza A and B detection.RESULTS:Influenza detection using either method wa… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
3
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Third, in our experiments we used a LPAIV strain H4N6 which does not lead to clinical signs due to the fact that it establishes low grade infection. Consequently, we resorted to real-time PCR technique to quantify this low grade H4N6 LPAIV infection in the observed tissues, which is more sensitive than the immunofluorescent assay (Landry et al, 2008;Perosa et al, 2013), although immunofluorescent assay would have given more meaningful data relevant to H4N6 LPAIV infection in the observed respiratory and gastrointestinal tissues.…”
Section: Decreasing the Staining Intensity Of Kul01+ Cells Using Clodmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, in our experiments we used a LPAIV strain H4N6 which does not lead to clinical signs due to the fact that it establishes low grade infection. Consequently, we resorted to real-time PCR technique to quantify this low grade H4N6 LPAIV infection in the observed tissues, which is more sensitive than the immunofluorescent assay (Landry et al, 2008;Perosa et al, 2013), although immunofluorescent assay would have given more meaningful data relevant to H4N6 LPAIV infection in the observed respiratory and gastrointestinal tissues.…”
Section: Decreasing the Staining Intensity Of Kul01+ Cells Using Clodmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These tests mostly have a specificity greater than 80% and sensitivity of 47-93% depending on virus and viral load. [71,72] These tests are not available for some viruses (e.g., bocavirus, coronavirus, and rhinovirus), and presents lower sensitivity for detection of viruses in co-infections compared with nucleic acid amplification methods.…”
Section: Antigen Detectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Total nucleic acids were extracted using the QIAamp Viral RNA Mini Kit (QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany), according to the manufacturer instructions. The specimens were then tested for the presence of respiratory viruses according to PCR protocols available at our laboratory for influenza A (FLU A) and B (FLU B) viruses [25,26], human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [27], human rhinovirus (HRV) [28], human metapneumovirus (hMPV) [29], human coronavirus (HCoV) [30], human adenovirus (HAdV) [31,32], and parainfluenza virus (PIV 1,2,3,4) [33,34].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%