Cargando…
Comparison of detection methods for adenovirus from enteric clinical specimens
Fecal samples submitted for virus examination over July 1990 to June 1991 from children <3 years of age were examined by electron microscopy (EM), virus culture (VC), and enzyme immunoassay [EIA, group-reactive and adenovirus (Ad) 40/41 specific; Cambridge BioScience] to compare the detection rat...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Published by Elsevier Inc.
1994
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7135712/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7924208 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0732-8893(94)90086-8 |
_version_ | 1783518118155386880 |
---|---|
author | Ahluwalia, Gurmukh S. Scott-Taylor, Tim H. Klisko, Brian Hammond, Gregory W. |
author_facet | Ahluwalia, Gurmukh S. Scott-Taylor, Tim H. Klisko, Brian Hammond, Gregory W. |
author_sort | Ahluwalia, Gurmukh S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Fecal samples submitted for virus examination over July 1990 to June 1991 from children <3 years of age were examined by electron microscopy (EM), virus culture (VC), and enzyme immunoassay [EIA, group-reactive and adenovirus (Ad) 40/41 specific; Cambridge BioScience] to compare the detection rate of adenovirus from pediatric fecal specimens. Ad isolates of serotypes 1–7 grown in HEp-2 or primary rhesus monkey kidney cells were identified by neutralization. Graham 293 cell cultures were used only when specimens were found to be positive for Ad by EM, type-specific Ad40/41 EIA, and for isolates not identified by neutralization. Ads grown in 293 cells were identified by DNA restriction endonuclease analysis. Of the 1187 specimens examined, 105 (9%) were found to be positive for Ad. VC detected 93, while 12 additional positives were detected by EM or EIA. The relative sensitivity of VC, EIA, and EM for the 105 specimens was 89% (93), 45% (47), and 35% (37), respectively. Among the 105 positive specimens, enteric Ad, nonenteric Ad, and untypeable Ad were 28% (29), 65% (68), and 7% (8), respectively. Of 37 EM positives, 62% (23) were enteric Ad; 27% (10) were nonenteric including serotypes 2, 3, 4, 5, 12, and 31, with 4, 1, 1, 2, 1, and 1 isolates of each type positive, respectively; and 11% (4) were detectable only by EM. Five isolates were identified as variant of Ad 2(3), Ad 3(1) and Ad 31(1). Over a 1-year period, a single Ad41 variant strain was the most frequently detected enteric Ad in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. For maximum detection rates of Ad viruses in pediatric fecal specimens, a combination of EM, VC, and EIA is required, but group-reactive EIA, or EM followed by Ad40/41-specific EIA of initial positives, are the most direct and efficient methods for enteric Ad detection. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7135712 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 1994 |
publisher | Published by Elsevier Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71357122020-04-08 Comparison of detection methods for adenovirus from enteric clinical specimens Ahluwalia, Gurmukh S. Scott-Taylor, Tim H. Klisko, Brian Hammond, Gregory W. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis Virology Fecal samples submitted for virus examination over July 1990 to June 1991 from children <3 years of age were examined by electron microscopy (EM), virus culture (VC), and enzyme immunoassay [EIA, group-reactive and adenovirus (Ad) 40/41 specific; Cambridge BioScience] to compare the detection rate of adenovirus from pediatric fecal specimens. Ad isolates of serotypes 1–7 grown in HEp-2 or primary rhesus monkey kidney cells were identified by neutralization. Graham 293 cell cultures were used only when specimens were found to be positive for Ad by EM, type-specific Ad40/41 EIA, and for isolates not identified by neutralization. Ads grown in 293 cells were identified by DNA restriction endonuclease analysis. Of the 1187 specimens examined, 105 (9%) were found to be positive for Ad. VC detected 93, while 12 additional positives were detected by EM or EIA. The relative sensitivity of VC, EIA, and EM for the 105 specimens was 89% (93), 45% (47), and 35% (37), respectively. Among the 105 positive specimens, enteric Ad, nonenteric Ad, and untypeable Ad were 28% (29), 65% (68), and 7% (8), respectively. Of 37 EM positives, 62% (23) were enteric Ad; 27% (10) were nonenteric including serotypes 2, 3, 4, 5, 12, and 31, with 4, 1, 1, 2, 1, and 1 isolates of each type positive, respectively; and 11% (4) were detectable only by EM. Five isolates were identified as variant of Ad 2(3), Ad 3(1) and Ad 31(1). Over a 1-year period, a single Ad41 variant strain was the most frequently detected enteric Ad in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. For maximum detection rates of Ad viruses in pediatric fecal specimens, a combination of EM, VC, and EIA is required, but group-reactive EIA, or EM followed by Ad40/41-specific EIA of initial positives, are the most direct and efficient methods for enteric Ad detection. Published by Elsevier Inc. 1994-03 2002-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7135712/ /pubmed/7924208 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0732-8893(94)90086-8 Text en Copyright © 1994 Published by Elsevier Inc. 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 | Virology Ahluwalia, Gurmukh S. Scott-Taylor, Tim H. Klisko, Brian Hammond, Gregory W. Comparison of detection methods for adenovirus from enteric clinical specimens |
title | Comparison of detection methods for adenovirus from enteric clinical specimens |
title_full | Comparison of detection methods for adenovirus from enteric clinical specimens |
title_fullStr | Comparison of detection methods for adenovirus from enteric clinical specimens |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of detection methods for adenovirus from enteric clinical specimens |
title_short | Comparison of detection methods for adenovirus from enteric clinical specimens |
title_sort | comparison of detection methods for adenovirus from enteric clinical specimens |
topic | Virology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7135712/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7924208 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0732-8893(94)90086-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ahluwaliagurmukhs comparisonofdetectionmethodsforadenovirusfromentericclinicalspecimens AT scotttaylortimh comparisonofdetectionmethodsforadenovirusfromentericclinicalspecimens AT kliskobrian comparisonofdetectionmethodsforadenovirusfromentericclinicalspecimens AT hammondgregoryw comparisonofdetectionmethodsforadenovirusfromentericclinicalspecimens |