Takimoto S, Grandien M, Ishida M A, Pereira M S, Paiva T M, Ishimaru T, Makita E M, Martinez C H
Serviço de Virologia, Instituto Adolfo Lutz, São Paulo, Brazil.
J Clin Microbiol. 1991 Mar;29(3):470-4. doi: 10.1128/jcm.29.3.470-474.1991.
Nasopharyngeal secretions obtained from 94 children with acute respiratory illness were examined for the presence of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), adenovirus, and influenza virus type A by virus culturing (virus isolation technique [VIT]), immunofluorescence assay (IFA), and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Similar results were obtained in at least two tests for RSV, influenza virus type A, and adenovirus in 92 (97.9%), 88 (93.6%), and 88 (93.6%) cases, respectively. Both rapid virus detection methods showed good specificity for the diagnosis of these virus infections (greater than or equal to 90.7%) and were more sensitive than was VIT for RSV detection. In a more accurate statistical analysis, the indexes of agreement between VIT and ELISA were substantial for RSV (kappa = 0.69; zeta = 5.5; P less than 0.0001), influenza virus type A (kappa = 0.67; zeta = 5.3; P less than 0.0001), and adenovirus (kappa = 0.71; zeta = 6.0; P less than 0.0001), while it was almost perfect for RSV when ELISA was compared with IFA (kappa = 0.88; zeta = 5.7; P less than 0.0001). Although the observed agreement was good in the comparison of these two tests for these three viruses (89%0, the indexes of agreement were moderate in the comparison of IFA and VIT for RSV (K = 0.55; Z = 2.0; P < 0.05), influenza virus type A (K = 0.42; Z = 9.7; P < 0.0001), and adenovirus (K = 0.41; Z = 6.5; P < 0.0001) and of ELISA and IFA for influenza virus type A (K = 0.55; Z = 7.0; P < 0.0001) and adenovirus (K = 0.59; Z = 6.8; P < 0.0001). All of the statistical evaluations demonstrated better agreement between ELISA and VIT for influenza virus type A and adenovirus.
通过病毒培养(病毒分离技术[VIT])、免疫荧光测定法(IFA)和酶联免疫吸附测定法(ELISA),对94例患有急性呼吸道疾病的儿童的鼻咽分泌物进行检测,以确定是否存在呼吸道合胞病毒(RSV)、腺病毒和甲型流感病毒。在92例(97.9%)、88例(93.6%)和88例(93.6%)病例中,分别至少有两项检测对RSV、甲型流感病毒和腺病毒得出了相似结果。两种快速病毒检测方法对这些病毒感染的诊断均显示出良好的特异性(大于或等于90.7%),并且在检测RSV方面比VIT更敏感。在更精确的统计分析中,VIT与ELISA之间对于RSV(kappa = 0.69;zeta = 5.5;P < 0.0001)、甲型流感病毒(kappa = 0.67;zeta = 5.3;P < 0.0001)和腺病毒(kappa = 0.71;zeta = 6.0;P < 0.0001)的一致性指标较高,而当将ELISA与IFA进行比较时,对于RSV的一致性指标几乎完美(kappa = 0.88;zeta = 5.7;P < 0.0001)。尽管在对这三种病毒的这两种检测方法的比较中观察到的一致性良好(89%),但在对RSV的IFA与VIT的比较中(K = 0.55;Z = 2.0;P < 0.05)、甲型流感病毒(K = 0.42;Z = 9.7;P < 0.0001)和腺病毒(K = 0.41;Z = 6.5;P < 0.0001)以及对甲型流感病毒的ELISA与IFA的比较中(K = 0.55;Z = 7.0;P < 0.0001)和腺病毒(K = 0.59;Z = 6.8;P < 0.0001),一致性指标为中等。所有统计评估均表明,ELISA与VIT在甲型流感病毒和腺病毒方面的一致性更好。