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: [Evaluation of 5 methods for the diagnosis of infections by respiratory syncytial virus].
    Author: Ramírez de Arellano E, Aznar J, Pascual A.
    Journal: Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin; 1992 Feb; 10(2):103-6. PubMed ID: 1643129.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: To compare and evaluate four different rapid methods of respiratory syncytial virus antigen detection with the isolation of the virus in cell culture. METHOD: Ninety-eight nasopharyngeal swabs were studied, for respiratory syncytial virus isolation in Hep-2 cell line and for RSV antigen detection using direct immunofluorescence and three ELISA methods: Abbot RSV EIA (ELISA-1), RSV Antigen Detection System (ELISA-2) and Directigen RSV (Directigen). RESULTS: Of all 98 samples studied using the five mentioned methods, 42 (43%) were positive for respiratory syncytial virus. The most sensitive methods were ELISA-1 (82%) and immunofluorescence (82%). The most specific ones were direct immunofluorescence (86%) and Directigen (84%). The higher percentage of concordant positive results with respiratory syncytial virus culture were direct immunofluorescence (84%) and Directigen (82%). CONCLUSIONS: Rapid diagnostic methods for respiratory syncytial virus infection can not substitute the isolation method using cell line culture. We believe that respiratory syncytial virus isolation in cell culture combined direct with direct immunofluorescence or Directigen methods are the first choice diagnostic techniques for achieve a higher number of positive results in respiratory syncytial virus infected patients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]