Rapid and highly sensitive coxsackievirus a indirect immunofluorescence assay typing kit for enterovirus serotyping - PubMed (original) (raw)

Rapid and highly sensitive coxsackievirus a indirect immunofluorescence assay typing kit for enterovirus serotyping

Tsuey-Li Lin et al. J Clin Microbiol. 2008 Feb.

Abstract

We describe the development and evaluation of an indirect immunofluorescence assay (IFA) kit for rapid and sensitive detection of coxsackievirus A2, -4, -5, -6, and -10. This IFA kit was determined to have 95.9 to 100% sensitivity and 95.8 to 97.2% specificity. It also proved to be beneficial in reducing the number of enteroviruses that are untypeable in the clinical virology laboratory.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIG. 1.

FIG. 1.

Results of retest of untypeable NPEV by use of the coxsackievirus IFA typing kit set 1. (Upper panel) Pie charts display the percentages of enteroviruses taken from patient specimens of throat swabs, rectal swabs, nasopharyngeal swabs, stool, and CSF by the virology laboratory network and reported to CDC Taiwan from 2002 to 2006. The specific serotype is indicated if the rate was higher than 10%. “Others” include all other serotypes that were reported at rates lower than 10%. Untypeable NPEV are indicated by the black portions of the charts. (Lower panel) Pie charts indicating the changes in identification rates for untypeables after the specimens were retested with the designed kit.

FIG. 2.

FIG. 2.

Photographs of IFA staining using coxsackievirus IFA typing kit set 1. (A1 to A5) RD cells infected with the specified CVA2, -4, -5, -6, or -10. The infected cells were held until a 2+ cytopathic effect was obtained and then stained with the reagent blend to show the positive greenish-yellow fluorescence. (B1 to B5) Positive results that occurred when the infecting virus matched the specified IFA staining reagent. (C1 to C5) Uninfected RD cells stained with the serotype-specific IFA reagent which served as negative controls. (D1 and D2) Negative results that occurred when the infected isolates were different (CVA16 and EV71, respectively) and stained with the reagent blend.

References

    1. Bastis, D., S. Simonet, M. A. Patterson, and S. Neill. 1995. Identification of enteroviruses by indirect immunofluorescence using monoclonal antibodies. Clin. Diagn. Virol. 383-93. - PubMed
    1. Fauquet, C. M., M. A. Mayo, J. Maniloff, U. Desselberger, and L. A. Ball (ed.). 2005. Virus taxonomy, eighth report of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
    1. Ho, M., E. R. Chen, K. H. Hsu, S. J. Twu, K. T. Chen, J. R. Wang, S. R. Shih, et al. 1999. An epidemic of enterovirus 71 infection in Taiwan. N. Engl. J. Med. 341929-935. - PubMed
    1. Hyypiä, T., T. Hovi, N. J. Knowles, and G. Stanway. 1997. Classification of enteroviruses based on molecular and biological properties. J. Gen. Virol. 781-11. - PubMed
    1. Kamitsuka, P. S., M. E. Soergel, and H. A. Wenner. 1961. Production and standardization of Echo reference antisera. Am. J. Hyg. 747-25. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources