RS virus diagnosis: comparison of isolation, immunofluorescence and enzyme immunoassay

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Siqueira,Marilda M.
Data de Publicação: 1986
Outros Autores: Ferreira,Vanja, Nascimento,Jussara P.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
Texto Completo: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0074-02761986000200013
Resumo: Two techniques for rapid diagnosis, immunofluorescence (IFAT) and enzyme immunoassay (EIA), have been compared with virus isolaion in tissue culture for the detection of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in specimens of nasopharyngeal secretions. The specimens were obtained from children under five years of age suffering from acute respiratory iliness, during a period of six months from January to June 1982. Of 471 specimens examined 54 (11.5%) were positive by virus isolation and 180 (38.2%) were positive by immunofluorescence. The bacterial contamination of inoculated tissue cultures unfortunately prevented the isolation of virus from many samples. Specimens from 216 children were tested to compare enzyme immunoassay and immunofluorescence. Of these 60 (27%) were positive by EIA and 121 (56%) were positive by IFAT. Our results suggest that the EIA technique although highly specific is rather insensitive. This may be because by the time these tests were done the originl nasopharyngeal secretions were considerably diluted and contained more mucus fragments than the call suspension used for IFAT. Of the three techniques, IFAT gives the best results although EIA may be useful where IFAT is not possible.
id FIOCRUZ-4_879cc72cb0003f3796ebd6ab14690263
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0074-02761986000200013
network_acronym_str FIOCRUZ-4
network_name_str Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
spelling RS virus diagnosis: comparison of isolation, immunofluorescence and enzyme immunoassayrespiratory syncytial virusrapid diagnosisimmunofluorescenceenzyme immunoassayTwo techniques for rapid diagnosis, immunofluorescence (IFAT) and enzyme immunoassay (EIA), have been compared with virus isolaion in tissue culture for the detection of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in specimens of nasopharyngeal secretions. The specimens were obtained from children under five years of age suffering from acute respiratory iliness, during a period of six months from January to June 1982. Of 471 specimens examined 54 (11.5%) were positive by virus isolation and 180 (38.2%) were positive by immunofluorescence. The bacterial contamination of inoculated tissue cultures unfortunately prevented the isolation of virus from many samples. Specimens from 216 children were tested to compare enzyme immunoassay and immunofluorescence. Of these 60 (27%) were positive by EIA and 121 (56%) were positive by IFAT. Our results suggest that the EIA technique although highly specific is rather insensitive. This may be because by the time these tests were done the originl nasopharyngeal secretions were considerably diluted and contained more mucus fragments than the call suspension used for IFAT. Of the three techniques, IFAT gives the best results although EIA may be useful where IFAT is not possible.Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Ministério da Saúde1986-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0074-02761986000200013Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz v.81 n.2 1986reponame:Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruzinstname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruzinstacron:FIOCRUZ10.1590/S0074-02761986000200013info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSiqueira,Marilda M.Ferreira,VanjaNascimento,Jussara P.eng2020-04-25T17:45:42Zhttp://www.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php0074-02761678-8060opendoar:null2020-04-26 02:01:19.767Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz - Fundação Oswaldo Cruztrue
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv RS virus diagnosis: comparison of isolation, immunofluorescence and enzyme immunoassay
title RS virus diagnosis: comparison of isolation, immunofluorescence and enzyme immunoassay
spellingShingle RS virus diagnosis: comparison of isolation, immunofluorescence and enzyme immunoassay
Siqueira,Marilda M.
respiratory syncytial virus
rapid diagnosis
immunofluorescence
enzyme immunoassay
title_short RS virus diagnosis: comparison of isolation, immunofluorescence and enzyme immunoassay
title_full RS virus diagnosis: comparison of isolation, immunofluorescence and enzyme immunoassay
title_fullStr RS virus diagnosis: comparison of isolation, immunofluorescence and enzyme immunoassay
title_full_unstemmed RS virus diagnosis: comparison of isolation, immunofluorescence and enzyme immunoassay
title_sort RS virus diagnosis: comparison of isolation, immunofluorescence and enzyme immunoassay
author Siqueira,Marilda M.
author_facet Siqueira,Marilda M.
Ferreira,Vanja
Nascimento,Jussara P.
author_role author
author2 Ferreira,Vanja
Nascimento,Jussara P.
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Siqueira,Marilda M.
Ferreira,Vanja
Nascimento,Jussara P.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv respiratory syncytial virus
rapid diagnosis
immunofluorescence
enzyme immunoassay
topic respiratory syncytial virus
rapid diagnosis
immunofluorescence
enzyme immunoassay
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Two techniques for rapid diagnosis, immunofluorescence (IFAT) and enzyme immunoassay (EIA), have been compared with virus isolaion in tissue culture for the detection of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in specimens of nasopharyngeal secretions. The specimens were obtained from children under five years of age suffering from acute respiratory iliness, during a period of six months from January to June 1982. Of 471 specimens examined 54 (11.5%) were positive by virus isolation and 180 (38.2%) were positive by immunofluorescence. The bacterial contamination of inoculated tissue cultures unfortunately prevented the isolation of virus from many samples. Specimens from 216 children were tested to compare enzyme immunoassay and immunofluorescence. Of these 60 (27%) were positive by EIA and 121 (56%) were positive by IFAT. Our results suggest that the EIA technique although highly specific is rather insensitive. This may be because by the time these tests were done the originl nasopharyngeal secretions were considerably diluted and contained more mucus fragments than the call suspension used for IFAT. Of the three techniques, IFAT gives the best results although EIA may be useful where IFAT is not possible.
description Two techniques for rapid diagnosis, immunofluorescence (IFAT) and enzyme immunoassay (EIA), have been compared with virus isolaion in tissue culture for the detection of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in specimens of nasopharyngeal secretions. The specimens were obtained from children under five years of age suffering from acute respiratory iliness, during a period of six months from January to June 1982. Of 471 specimens examined 54 (11.5%) were positive by virus isolation and 180 (38.2%) were positive by immunofluorescence. The bacterial contamination of inoculated tissue cultures unfortunately prevented the isolation of virus from many samples. Specimens from 216 children were tested to compare enzyme immunoassay and immunofluorescence. Of these 60 (27%) were positive by EIA and 121 (56%) were positive by IFAT. Our results suggest that the EIA technique although highly specific is rather insensitive. This may be because by the time these tests were done the originl nasopharyngeal secretions were considerably diluted and contained more mucus fragments than the call suspension used for IFAT. Of the three techniques, IFAT gives the best results although EIA may be useful where IFAT is not possible.
publishDate 1986
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 1986-06-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0074-02761986000200013
url http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0074-02761986000200013
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S0074-02761986000200013
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Ministério da Saúde
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Ministério da Saúde
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz v.81 n.2 1986
reponame:Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
instname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz
instacron:FIOCRUZ
reponame_str Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
collection Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
instname_str Fundação Oswaldo Cruz
instacron_str FIOCRUZ
institution FIOCRUZ
repository.name.fl_str_mv Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1669937646521024512