Cevenini R, Rumpianesi F, Mazzaracchio R, Donati M, Falcieri E, Lazzari R
J Infect. 1983 Sep;7(2):130-3. doi: 10.1016/s0163-4453(83)90527-3.
Four methods for detecting rotaviruses (latex agglutination, electron microscopy, immunofluorescence and ELISA) have been compared on 57 faecal samples from children with acute diarrhoea. Complete agreement among the four techniques was found in 38 samples. One sample was positive by ELISA and latex agglutination but negative by the other two. For all the other samples there was agreement among three of the techniques only. In a blocking ELISA test, samples positive by ELISA only, turned out to be falsely positive. Assuming true positive or negative for those samples for which at least three techniques were in agreement, electron microscopy, ELISA and latex agglutination were more sensitive (96 per cent) than immunofluorescence (84 per cent). Electron microscopy was the most specific (96.4 per cent), followed by immunofluorescence (92.9 per cent), ELISA (89.4 per cent) and latex agglutination (85.9 per cent).
对来自患有急性腹泻儿童的57份粪便样本,比较了四种检测轮状病毒的方法(乳胶凝集试验、电子显微镜检查、免疫荧光法和酶联免疫吸附测定)。在38份样本中,四种技术的检测结果完全一致。有1份样本酶联免疫吸附测定和乳胶凝集试验呈阳性,但另外两种方法呈阴性。对于所有其他样本,只有三种技术的检测结果一致。在阻断酶联免疫吸附测定试验中,仅酶联免疫吸附测定呈阳性的样本结果为假阳性。假设对于至少三种技术检测结果一致的样本,其结果为真阳性或真阴性,那么电子显微镜检查、酶联免疫吸附测定和乳胶凝集试验比免疫荧光法(84%)更敏感(96%)。电子显微镜检查特异性最高(96.4%),其次是免疫荧光法(92.9%)、酶联免疫吸附测定(89.4%)和乳胶凝集试验(85.9%)。