Sensitivity of Respiratory Virus Culture When Screening with R-Mix Fresh Cells

Dunn, James J.; Woolstenhulme, R. Dean; Langer, Janine; Carroll, Karen C.

doi:10.1128/jcm.42.1.79-82.2004

Cited by 69 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However cryopreserved R-Mix ReadyCells did detect 55% more adenovirus after 1 day than conventional culture. Dunn et al reported a similar detection rate (68.6%) at 1 day and mentioned the requirement of extended incubation (Dunn et al, 2004). In our extended incubation the detection rate increased to 90% after 3 days.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…1016/j.jcv.2008.03.015 Conventional viral culture, which has been the gold standard for respiratory virus diagnosis, may often require several days to detect respiratory viruses, as well as several specific cell lines for each respiratory virus. Recently R-Mix, a combination of human lung carcinoma cells and mink lung cells (strains A-549 and Mv1Lu, respectively) co-cultivated in a balanced single monolayer was reported to exhibit sensitivity for respiratory virus detection comparable with other viral detection methods (Barenfanger et al, 2001;Dunn et al, 2004;Fong et al, 2000;Huang et al, 2002;St George et al, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Enhanced detection of respiratory viruses using cryopreserved R-Mix ReadyCells

Kim

Bae

et al. 2008

Journal of Clinical Virology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Enhanced detection of respiratory viruses using cryopreserved R-Mix ReadyCells

Kim

Bae

et al. 2008

Journal of Clinical Virology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Importantly, a small number of studies have described the immediate culture of pediatric patient specimens as having a very high sensitivity for RSV and influenza virus detection when cell culture was performed on site (20,37). In addition to the importance of immediate virus isolation for accurate cell culture results, the methodology is also heterogeneous and the sensitivity for the detection of these viruses differs when different cell culture methods are used (12,27,29,42).…”

Section: Culture Pcrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Isolation of RSV and influenza virus with R-mix cells can provide positive culture results in as little as 1 to 2 days, whereas conventional tube culture methods typically provide a 5-to 6-day turnaround time for positive specimens (12,42). The average turnaround times in this study for specimens positive by tube cell culture for RSV and influenza virus were 10.6 and 8.8 days, respectively.…”

Section: Culture Pcrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Viral Isolation and Multiplex Real-Time Reverse Transcription-PCR for Confirmation of Respiratory Syncytial Virus and Influenza Virus Detection by Antigen Immunoassays

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We evaluated the Prodesse ProFlu-1 real-time reverse transcription-PCR multiplex assay with the SmartCycler instrument for the detection of human respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza A and B viruses in comparison to conventional cell culture and antigen immunoassays with the BD Directigen A؉B and Binax NOW RSV assays over two successive respiratory virus seasons. Ninety-two percent of the 361 specimens tested were nasopharyngeal aspirates obtained from individual patients, of which 119 were positive for RSV and 59 were positive for influenza virus. The median age of the patients whose specimens were positive for RSV and influenza virus were 6.3 months and 42.4 years, respectively. The specificity of all of the methods tested was >99%, and the individual sensitivities of NOW RSV, RSV culture, Directigen A؉B, influenza virus culture, and the Proflu-1 PCR for influenza/RSV were 82% (95% confidence interval [CI], 73 to 88), 57% (95% CI, 44 to 69), 59% (95% CI, 44 to 72), 54% (95% CI, 38 to 69), and 98% (95% CI, 93 to 100)/95% (95% CI, 85 to 99), respectively. In a clinical setting where viral isolation is performed to confirm rapid antigen immunoassay results for these common respiratory viruses, one-step real-time reverse transcriptase PCR testing can be a more sensitive and timely confirmatory method.Human respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza A and B viruses are respiratory pathogens associated with substantial morbidity and mortality annually (43). Virtually all children become infected with RSV within 2 years after birth, and 1% require hospitalization (15). Although the importance of RSV as a cause of pneumonia and brochiolitis in young children is well recognized (21), the most serious morbidity and highest mortality associated with both RSV and influenza virus circulation occurs disproportionately among elderly persons (43). The first-line tests used to detect these virus infections in many hospitals are antigen-based immunoassays. It has been demonstrated that antigen immunoassays have exceedingly poor sensitivity in detecting RSV and influenza virus infections in the elderly, seriously limiting their utility for detecting and confirming institutional or community outbreaks (7,13,38). This study was intended to evaluate the performance of viral isolation in cell culture, one-step real-time multiplex reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR), and antigen immunoassays for the detection of influenza virus and RSV in respiratory specimens from adults and children during two respiratory virus seasons. MATERIALS AND METHODS Specimens.Upper respiratory tract specimens were collected from 353 individual symptomatic patients during two successive winter respiratory virus seasons encompassing

show abstract

“…Viral culture is still considered the "gold standard" method, but traditional culture generally requires at least 3 days or longer to obtain a positive result. Rapid viral culture methods using "shell vial" assays have been applied to speed up the time to detection (8)(9)(10)(11). Nucleic acid amplification methods offer very high test sensitivities and same-day results, but there are no FDA-cleared nucleic acid amplification tests for influenza virus detection.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the Quidel QuickVue Test for Detection of Influenza A and B Viruses in the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Setting by Use of Three Specimen Collection Methods

Agoritsas¹,

Mack

Bonsu

et al. 2006

J Clin Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Quidel QuickVue influenza test was compared to viral culture and reverse transcriptase PCR by the use of three different respiratory specimen types. Of 122 pediatric subjects enrolled, 59 had influenza virus infections: 44 were infected with influenza A virus and 15 were infected with influenza B virus. The sensitivity of the QuickVue test was 85% with nasopharyngeal swabs, 78% with nasal swabs, and 69% with nasopharyngeal washes. Specificities were equivalent (97% to 98%) for all three collection methods.During annual outbreaks of influenza A and B virus infection, it is estimated that 10 to 20% of the residential population of the United States may be affected and that the highest attack rates occur in school-age children (1,5,6,16,18,20). The rapid and accurate diagnosis of cases of influenza is desirable for management of children presenting to a pediatric hospital's emergency department (ED). A laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of influenza supports the appropriate use of antiviral therapy for patients to be admitted to the hospital as well as for patients to be discharged from the ED and managed as outpatients. A specific diagnosis also decreases the inappropriate use of antibiotics, other diagnostic testing, and the patient's length of stay in the ED (1,15,18,20).Several methods for laboratory diagnosis of influenza are available; these include viral culture, direct antigen detection, and direct nucleic acid amplification and detection. Viral culture is still considered the "gold standard" method, but traditional culture generally requires at least 3 days or longer to obtain a positive result. Rapid viral culture methods using "shell vial" assays have been applied to speed up the time to detection (8-11). Nucleic acid amplification methods offer very high test sensitivities and same-day results, but there are no FDA-cleared nucleic acid amplification tests for influenza virus detection. Respiratory virus antigen detection by direct or indirect immunofluorescence assay is widely used in laboratories with expertise in fluorescence microscopy, but these assays are often performed as "batch tests" a few times per day and are thus not truly rapid. Antigen detection methods which utilize single-use immunoassay test devices offer the potential for widespread test availability, relative ease of testing, and rapid turnaround (2-4, 8, 10, 12-14, 17, 21).There are limited published data on the impact of specimen type from the respiratory tract on the relative efficiencies of rapid immunoassay tests for influenza diagnosis (7, 12). Studies have examined nasopharyngeal (NP) aspirates and washes, posterior NP and throat swabs, and sputa; however, most studies have not included the collection of multiple specimen types from the same subjects. Aspirates and washes are generally considered superior to swab collections for detection of a variety of respiratory viruses, but swab samples are easier and faster to collect and may be preferred by healthcare providers in a busy ambulatory setting. In this study, we evaluated th...

show abstract

Sensitivity of Respiratory Virus Culture When Screening with R-Mix Fresh Cells

Abstract: Use of R-Mix

Cited by 69 publications

References 13 publications

Enhanced detection of respiratory viruses using cryopreserved R-Mix ReadyCells

Enhanced detection of respiratory viruses using cryopreserved R-Mix ReadyCells

Comparison of Viral Isolation and Multiplex Real-Time Reverse Transcription-PCR for Confirmation of Respiratory Syncytial Virus and Influenza Virus Detection by Antigen Immunoassays

Evaluation of the Quidel QuickVue Test for Detection of Influenza A and B Viruses in the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Setting by Use of Three Specimen Collection Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About