Efficiency of oral fluid collection devices in extracting antibodies.

C K Chang, M E Cohen, D R Bienek
{"title":"Efficiency of oral fluid collection devices in extracting antibodies.","authors":"C K Chang,&nbsp;M E Cohen,&nbsp;D R Bienek","doi":"10.1111/j.1399-302X.2008.00500.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To facilitate diagnoses, this study determined the efficacy of commercial oral fluid collection devices for their ability to recover three human immunoglobulin isotypes; immunoglobulin A (IgA), IgG, and IgM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to determine antibody recovery from the following devices: (i) OraSure oral specimen collection device, (ii) saliva*sampler, (iii) ORALscreen collector, (iv) Dri-Angle, (v) no. 2 cotton roll, (vi) all-gauze sponges device, and (vii) DentaSwabs. For each isotype tested, the recovered eluate was compared with the concentration applied to the device. The performance of each device was determined at various antibody concentrations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Recovery of IgA from the saliva*sampler, ORALscreen collector, Dri-Angle and cotton roll was comparable to that seeded onto the device. When compared with the seeded IgG concentration, the mean concentration of antibody recovered by each product differed by approximately +/- 9 ng/ml. The average amount of IgM recovered by the cotton roll and all-gauze sponges device was approximately 29 and 39 ng/ml, respectively, less (P < 0.0001) than that seeded on the device. For all isotypes tested, the amount of antibody recovered from the device was dependent on the initial seeding concentration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Collectively, these data suggest that the product used for specimen collection can affect retrieval of antibodies and potentially confound patient diagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":19630,"journal":{"name":"Oral microbiology and immunology","volume":"24 3","pages":"231-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1399-302X.2008.00500.x","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral microbiology and immunology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-302X.2008.00500.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Introduction: To facilitate diagnoses, this study determined the efficacy of commercial oral fluid collection devices for their ability to recover three human immunoglobulin isotypes; immunoglobulin A (IgA), IgG, and IgM.

Methods: The sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to determine antibody recovery from the following devices: (i) OraSure oral specimen collection device, (ii) saliva*sampler, (iii) ORALscreen collector, (iv) Dri-Angle, (v) no. 2 cotton roll, (vi) all-gauze sponges device, and (vii) DentaSwabs. For each isotype tested, the recovered eluate was compared with the concentration applied to the device. The performance of each device was determined at various antibody concentrations.

Results: Recovery of IgA from the saliva*sampler, ORALscreen collector, Dri-Angle and cotton roll was comparable to that seeded onto the device. When compared with the seeded IgG concentration, the mean concentration of antibody recovered by each product differed by approximately +/- 9 ng/ml. The average amount of IgM recovered by the cotton roll and all-gauze sponges device was approximately 29 and 39 ng/ml, respectively, less (P < 0.0001) than that seeded on the device. For all isotypes tested, the amount of antibody recovered from the device was dependent on the initial seeding concentration.

Conclusion: Collectively, these data suggest that the product used for specimen collection can affect retrieval of antibodies and potentially confound patient diagnosis.

口服液采集装置提取抗体的效率。
简介:为了便于诊断,本研究确定了商用口服液收集装置恢复三种人类免疫球蛋白同种型的功效;免疫球蛋白A (IgA), IgG和IgM。方法:采用夹心酶联免疫吸附法测定以下设备的抗体回收率:(i) OraSure口腔标本采集装置,(ii)唾液采样器,(iii) ORALscreen收集器,(iv) Dri-Angle, (v) no. 5。2个棉卷,(vi)全纱布海绵装置,(vii) DentaSwabs。对于测试的每个同型,回收的洗脱液与应用于设备的浓度进行比较。在不同的抗体浓度下测定每个装置的性能。结果:唾液取样器、ORALscreen收集器、Dri-Angle和棉卷中IgA的回收率与植入设备的IgA回收率相当。与种子IgG浓度比较,各产物回收的抗体平均浓度相差约+/- 9 ng/ml。棉卷和全纱海绵装置回收IgM的平均量分别约为29和39 ng/ml,比装置上播种的IgM少(P < 0.0001)。对于测试的所有同型,从装置中回收的抗体量取决于初始播种浓度。结论:总的来说,这些数据表明用于标本采集的产品可能影响抗体的检索,并可能混淆患者的诊断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信