These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of a new commercial enzyme immunoassay for rapid detection of respiratory syncytial virus.
    Author: Garea MT, Lopez JM, Perez del Molino ML, Coira A, Pardo F.
    Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis; 1992 Feb; 11(2):175-7. PubMed ID: 1396733.
    Abstract:
    Two rapid methods for detection of respiratory syncytial virus in respiratory specimens were compared: direct immunofluorescence assay (DFA) with monoclonal antibody and an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) (Test-Pack RSV). Ninety-five nasopharyngeal washings and aspirates from 51 children were examined; the patients were hospitalized during a winter outbreak of RSV infection in the first trimester of 1990. A total of 41.0% and 56.8% of these samples were positive by EIA and DFA respectively. Considering only the 51 specimens collected at the onset of illness, EIA detected 72.5% positive samples and DFA detected 78.4%. In comparison with DFA, EIA was 92.5% sensitive and 100% specific for the acute phase of illness. When all the samples were taken into account, specificity was maintained but sensitivity fell to 72.2%. The results show that both methods are useful during the acute phase of the illness, when the viral load is important. However, later on in the course of the infection DFA appears to be more sensitive than EIA.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]