Salomón H E, Grandien M, Avila M M, Pettersson C A, Weissenbacher M C
Department of Microbiology, University of Buenos Aires, Argentina.
J Med Virol. 1989 Jul;28(3):159-62. doi: 10.1002/jmv.1890280310.
A comparison of immunofluorescence (IF), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and isolation in tissue culture (TC) for detection of respiratory viruses was performed on 496 nasopharyngeal aspirates from children under 5 years of age with lower acute respiratory infections who were receiving attention at three hospitals in Buenos Aires, Argentina. All samples were tested by the three methods for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), influenza A and B, adenovirus, and parainfluenza 1 and 3. Viral diagnosis was made in 167 samples (33.7%); of these, 124 (74.3%) were isolated in TC, whereas 120 (71.8%) were detected by ELISA and 127 (76%) by IF. RSV was detected in 121 samples, mainly by ELISA and IF. The sensitivity and specificity of each rapid technique as compared with isolation in TC were similar, reaching 98% and 92%, respectively. When ELISA was compared with IF, the sensitivity was 95%, and the specificity was 98%. Adenovirus was detected in 18 patients by TC. For this virus, rapid techniques sensitivity as compared with TC was low (almost 22%). Parainfluenza 3 was readily detected by IF and TC; influenza A, B and parainfluenza 1 were detected in few samples; and tissue culture proved more efficient than rapid techniques. The results indicate that both rapid techniques are good tools for the detection of most respiratory viruses except for adenovirus, for which TC cannot be omitted.
对来自阿根廷布宜诺斯艾利斯三家医院接受治疗的496名5岁以下患有急性下呼吸道感染儿童的鼻咽抽吸物,进行了免疫荧光法(IF)、酶联免疫吸附测定法(ELISA)和组织培养法(TC)检测呼吸道病毒的比较。所有样本均采用这三种方法检测呼吸道合胞病毒(RSV)、甲型和乙型流感病毒、腺病毒以及1型和3型副流感病毒。167份样本(33.7%)作出了病毒诊断;其中,124份(74.3%)通过TC分离出来,120份(71.8%)通过ELISA检测到,127份(76%)通过IF检测到。121份样本检测到RSV,主要通过ELISA和IF。与TC分离法相比,每种快速检测技术的敏感性和特异性相似,分别达到98%和92%。ELISA与IF比较时,敏感性为95%,特异性为98%。通过TC在18例患者中检测到腺病毒。对于这种病毒,与TC相比,快速检测技术的敏感性较低(约22%)。3型副流感病毒很容易通过IF和TC检测到;甲型、乙型流感病毒和1型副流感病毒在少数样本中检测到;并且组织培养证明比快速检测技术更有效。结果表明,除腺病毒外,两种快速检测技术都是检测大多数呼吸道病毒的良好工具,对于腺病毒,不能省略TC检测。