Evaluation of five methods for respiratory syncytial virus detection

Abstract

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,

Human respiratory syncytial virus (hRSV) RNA quantification in nasopharyngeal secretions identifies the hRSV etiologic role in acute respiratory tract infections of hospitalized infants

“…hRSV infection in nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA) secretions is currently achieved by cell culture (CC) (Falsey et al, 2002;Johnston and Siegel, 1990;Malley et al, 1998), by the direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) assay (Fong et al, 2000;Halstead et al, 1990;Landry and Ferguson, 2000;Rovida et al, 2005) or by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) (Falsey et al, 2003;Freymuth et al, 1995;Paton et al, 1992;Perkins et al, 2005). However, the sole presence of hRSV in NPA is not per se indicative of the etiologic involvement of the virus in the current episode of ARTI.…”

Comparison of the “ProDect BCS RV CHIP” assay with the combination of shell vial cell culture and immunofluorescence antibody test for the detection of respiratory viruses

“…One of the most widely used methods for the diagnosis of viral respiratory infections is the isolation of viruses in shell vial cell culture and by immunofluorescence antibody tests (Halstead et al, 1990;Henrickson, 2005). Even though these methods are effective and often complementary, they have some disadvantages.…”

Detection of respiratory syncytial virus infection in nasal aspirate samples by flow cytometry

“…Several recent studies have reported very good specificities and sensitivities for EIA in comparison to culture, for the rapid diagnosis of RS virus infection in clinical specimens (Halstead et al, 1990;Subbarao et al, 1989;Johnston and Siegel, 1990;Kok et al, 1990;Freymuth et al, 1991). Although flow cytometry, as used in this study, was not as sensitive as several reported EIA techniques, further develpoment of flow cytometry as outlined above could considerably improve its performance.…”

“…The availability of effective therapy for RS virus infections, together with the need for early preventive measures to reduce nosocomial infections, has prompted the development of techniques for rapid diagnosis of RS virus infection. These include several enzyme immunoassays (EIA) for detection of viral antigens in clinical samples (Halstead et al, 1990;Subbarao et al, 1989;Johnston and Siegel, 1990;Kok et al, 1990;Freymuth et al, 1991), and a shell vial technique . When compared to TC, these methods have sensitivities of 71-95% and specificities of 80-100% in several recent studies.…”