[A comparative study of direct immunofluorescence, enzyme immunoassay, and culture for diagnosing metapneumovirus infection]
- PMID: 19423194
- DOI: 10.1016/j.eimc.2008.11.005
[A comparative study of direct immunofluorescence, enzyme immunoassay, and culture for diagnosing metapneumovirus infection]
Abstract
Introduction: Human metapneumovirus (hMPV) is an important cause of lower respiratory tract infections in children, accounting for 14% to 24% of all viral respiratory infections with an etiological diagnosis. This study compares a direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) test, enzyme immunoassay (EIA), and shell-vial culture for diagnosing acute bronchiolitis in infants.
Methods: A total of 124 nasopharyngeal aspirates from 108 infants with lower respiratory tract infection were analyzed. Incoming samples were processed for DFA using a commercial anti-hMPV antibody (Diagnostic Hybrids Inc.); 76 were inoculated in an LLC-MK2 cell line, and after an incubation period of 48 h, were stained and fixed with the aforementioned serum. The remaining sample was processed according to the routine diagnostic procedure and aliquots were frozen for EIA analysis (Biotrin).
Results: Twenty (16.12%) samples were positive for hMPV by DFA, 27 (21.77%) by EIA, and 15 (19.73%) by culture. DFA and EIA results were consistent in 92.73% of the 124 samples. Considering the 3 techniques, the same results were obtained in 90.78% of the 76 specimens. Considering only the first specimen from each patient (acute phase), the sensitivity, predictive values, and Kappa index for DFA improved and were very close to the EIA values.
Conclusion: DFA and EIA are useful for antigen detection in the diagnosis of acute hMPV infection, particularly in pediatric hospitals that do not have amplification techniques for this virus, and when a rapid diagnosis is required. It should be kept in mind that DFA analysis is a suitable test for this purpose only in the acute phase of the infection.
Comment in
-
[Some considerations about the comparative study of diagnostic techniques for infections due to human metapneumovirus].Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin. 2010 Aug-Sep;28(7):477-8; author reply 478. doi: 10.1016/j.eimc.2009.07.013. Epub 2010 Jan 25. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin. 2010. PMID: 20097451 Spanish. No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Usefulness of two new methods for diagnosing metapneumovirus infections in children.Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010 Nov;16(11):1663-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2010.03192.x. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010. PMID: 20156218
-
Rapid detection of human metapneumovirus strains in nasopharyngeal aspirates and shell vial cultures by monoclonal antibodies.J Clin Microbiol. 2005 Jul;43(7):3443-6. doi: 10.1128/JCM.43.7.3443-3446.2005. J Clin Microbiol. 2005. PMID: 16000473 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of different cell lines and incubation times in the isolation by the shell vial culture of human metapneumovirus from pediatric respiratory samples.J Clin Virol. 2007 Sep;40(1):46-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2007.06.006. Epub 2007 Jul 17. J Clin Virol. 2007. PMID: 17644404
-
Human metapneumovirus pneumonia in children: results of an Italian study and mini-review.Scand J Infect Dis. 2008;40(10):821-6. doi: 10.1080/00365540802227110. Scand J Infect Dis. 2008. PMID: 18618373 Review.
-
[Human metapneumovirus--virologic and diagnostic aspects].Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2005 Oct 20;125(20):2766-8. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2005. PMID: 16244676 Review. Norwegian.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources