Comparison of a direct immunofluorescence assay (Oxoid IMAGEN®) and a multiplex RT-PCR DNA microarray assay (CLART® PneumoVir) for the detection of respiratory viruses in hospitalized children
•Multiplex RT-PCR microarray assay provided superior detection rates than those of immunofluorescence assay for respiratory viruses in nasopharyngeal samples.•Detection of co-infections of respiratory viruses were common, representing 27.4 % of the samples tested by the RT-PCR method.•Rhinovirus was...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of virological methods 2020-10, Vol.284, p.113930-113930, Article 113930 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | •Multiplex RT-PCR microarray assay provided superior detection rates than those of immunofluorescence assay for respiratory viruses in nasopharyngeal samples.•Detection of co-infections of respiratory viruses were common, representing 27.4 % of the samples tested by the RT-PCR method.•Rhinovirus was a clinically important pathogen in hospitalized children.
The objective of this study was to compare the positive detection rates obtained using the Oxoid IMAGEN® direct immunofluorescence assay (designated as IF) with those obtained using the CLART® PneumoVir multiplex RT-PCR DNA microarray assay (designated as RT-PCR) in the diagnosis of respiratory viruses in hospitalized children. This was a retrospective study of 62 individuals < 18 years old who had nasopharyngeal aspirates collected for virus identification in a tertiary university hospital in south Brazil between January 1st, 2014 and December 31st, 2014. All 62 nasopharingeal aspirates were analyzed using both assay methods. The main outcome to be measured was the difference in the proportion of test samples returning a positive virus detection result between the IF and the RT-PCR. The McNemar test was used for data analysis and the results showed that the RT-PCR and the IF methods produced 55 (88.7 %) and 17 (27.4 %) virus-positive samples, respectively (p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0166-0934 1879-0984 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.jviromet.2020.113930 |