Cargando…

Prospective comparison of R-mix™ shell vial system with direct antigen tests and conventional cell culture for respiratory virus detection

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Conventional cell culture (CC) has limited clinical utility as a result of the extended incubation period often required for virus isolation. Alternative methodologies have been introduced in an effort to improve turnaround times. One such system, the R-mix™ shell vial is...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: LaSala, P. Rocco, Bufton, Kimberly K., Ismail, Nahed, Smith, Michael B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier B.V. 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7108409/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17229589
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2006.12.015
_version_ 1783512806614630400
author LaSala, P. Rocco
Bufton, Kimberly K.
Ismail, Nahed
Smith, Michael B.
author_facet LaSala, P. Rocco
Bufton, Kimberly K.
Ismail, Nahed
Smith, Michael B.
author_sort LaSala, P. Rocco
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Conventional cell culture (CC) has limited clinical utility as a result of the extended incubation period often required for virus isolation. Alternative methodologies have been introduced in an effort to improve turnaround times. One such system, the R-mix™ shell vial is discussed herein. The study objectives were: (a) to establish R-mix™ testing parameters as compared to direct antigen testing (DAT) and CC, and (b) to assess technical aspects and cost of R-mix™ in a high volume clinical virology laboratory. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective analysis of respiratory samples submitted to the clinical virology laboratory between November 2004 and April 2005 was performed. All specimens were inoculated onto R-mix™ shell vials (SV) and CC tubes; and a subset also underwent DAT for influenza A and B and/or RSV. A retrospective estimated cost analysis was made. RESULTS: A total of 563 samples were included in the study, which collectively revealed a total of 207 viruses. Sensitivity of R-mix™ for seven major respiratory viruses ranged from 45% to 83% compared to CC and DAT, while mean time to detection (TTD) varied from 1.1 to 1.4 days. In addition to these viruses, 23 picornaviruses, 11 CMV isolates and 5 HSV isolates were detected by CC alone. CONCLUSIONS: The R-mix™ system has similar sensitivity as CC for the detection of parainfluenza 1–3 and influenza A/B while dramatically reducing the TTD. Furthermore, it is significantly more sensitive and produces more timely results for RSV than CC; yet, neither method offers a diagnostic benefit over rapid DAT for RSV detection. The sensitivity of R-mix™ for adenovirus appears to be significantly lower than that of CC. Lastly, methodologies other than R-mix™ must remain in place under circumstances where identification of other potential viral respiratory pathogens, including herpesviruses and picornaviruses, is desired.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7108409
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher Elsevier B.V.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71084092020-03-31 Prospective comparison of R-mix™ shell vial system with direct antigen tests and conventional cell culture for respiratory virus detection LaSala, P. Rocco Bufton, Kimberly K. Ismail, Nahed Smith, Michael B. J Clin Virol Article BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Conventional cell culture (CC) has limited clinical utility as a result of the extended incubation period often required for virus isolation. Alternative methodologies have been introduced in an effort to improve turnaround times. One such system, the R-mix™ shell vial is discussed herein. The study objectives were: (a) to establish R-mix™ testing parameters as compared to direct antigen testing (DAT) and CC, and (b) to assess technical aspects and cost of R-mix™ in a high volume clinical virology laboratory. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective analysis of respiratory samples submitted to the clinical virology laboratory between November 2004 and April 2005 was performed. All specimens were inoculated onto R-mix™ shell vials (SV) and CC tubes; and a subset also underwent DAT for influenza A and B and/or RSV. A retrospective estimated cost analysis was made. RESULTS: A total of 563 samples were included in the study, which collectively revealed a total of 207 viruses. Sensitivity of R-mix™ for seven major respiratory viruses ranged from 45% to 83% compared to CC and DAT, while mean time to detection (TTD) varied from 1.1 to 1.4 days. In addition to these viruses, 23 picornaviruses, 11 CMV isolates and 5 HSV isolates were detected by CC alone. CONCLUSIONS: The R-mix™ system has similar sensitivity as CC for the detection of parainfluenza 1–3 and influenza A/B while dramatically reducing the TTD. Furthermore, it is significantly more sensitive and produces more timely results for RSV than CC; yet, neither method offers a diagnostic benefit over rapid DAT for RSV detection. The sensitivity of R-mix™ for adenovirus appears to be significantly lower than that of CC. Lastly, methodologies other than R-mix™ must remain in place under circumstances where identification of other potential viral respiratory pathogens, including herpesviruses and picornaviruses, is desired. Elsevier B.V. 2007-03 2007-01-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7108409/ /pubmed/17229589 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2006.12.015 Text en Copyright © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Article
LaSala, P. Rocco
Bufton, Kimberly K.
Ismail, Nahed
Smith, Michael B.
Prospective comparison of R-mix™ shell vial system with direct antigen tests and conventional cell culture for respiratory virus detection
title Prospective comparison of R-mix™ shell vial system with direct antigen tests and conventional cell culture for respiratory virus detection
title_full Prospective comparison of R-mix™ shell vial system with direct antigen tests and conventional cell culture for respiratory virus detection
title_fullStr Prospective comparison of R-mix™ shell vial system with direct antigen tests and conventional cell culture for respiratory virus detection
title_full_unstemmed Prospective comparison of R-mix™ shell vial system with direct antigen tests and conventional cell culture for respiratory virus detection
title_short Prospective comparison of R-mix™ shell vial system with direct antigen tests and conventional cell culture for respiratory virus detection
title_sort prospective comparison of r-mix™ shell vial system with direct antigen tests and conventional cell culture for respiratory virus detection
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7108409/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17229589
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2006.12.015
work_keys_str_mv AT lasalaprocco prospectivecomparisonofrmixshellvialsystemwithdirectantigentestsandconventionalcellcultureforrespiratoryvirusdetection
AT buftonkimberlyk prospectivecomparisonofrmixshellvialsystemwithdirectantigentestsandconventionalcellcultureforrespiratoryvirusdetection
AT ismailnahed prospectivecomparisonofrmixshellvialsystemwithdirectantigentestsandconventionalcellcultureforrespiratoryvirusdetection
AT smithmichaelb prospectivecomparisonofrmixshellvialsystemwithdirectantigentestsandconventionalcellcultureforrespiratoryvirusdetection