The rapid diagnosis of viral infections.

M. Loeffelholz
{"title":"The rapid diagnosis of viral infections.","authors":"M. Loeffelholz","doi":"10.1309/E505-UL0Y-QX7A-JFMC","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"283 © The laboratory diagnosis of viral infections traditionally has been considered a lengthy process, providing results that may have minimal clinical impact. Specimens inoculated into cell culture tubes typically require incubation for several days prior to development of cytopathic effect or detection by methods such as hemadsorption. Culture tubes are often observed for 2 weeks or longer before reporting negative results. However, significant advances during the past 10 to 15 years in the development of viral diagnostic tests provide rapid and more useful results. Cell culture incubation times have been shortened significantly with the use of centrifugation enhanced shell vials. Methodologies that detect viral antigens or nucleic acids directly in patient specimens can be completed in minutes or hours. Decreased sensitivity and speci-ficity may accompany improved time to detection. The costs required to perform newer, rapid tests versus traditional culture methods are additional considerations. Rapid tests may have unique specimen requirements. All of these issues must be weighed carefully when considering which tests to offer. Respiratory Viruses Rapid tests have had more impact on the detection of respiratory viruses than any other group of viruses. Indeed, studies have demonstrated a number of positive outcomes of rapid detection of respiratory viruses in hospitalized patients, including decreased length of hospitalization, patient isolation, costs, and better use of antibiotics. 1,2 Respiratory viruses that are frequently identified by both traditional and rapid methods include influenza virus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), adenovirus, and parainfluenza virus. All of these viruses will grow in commonly available cell lines in tube cultures and are usually detectable after several days of incubation. However, influenza and parainfluenza viruses may not produce discernible cytopathic effect (CPE), requiring blind hemadsorption or immuno-fluorescence staining of cells. Respiratory syncytial virus is more labile than other respiratory viruses. Titers decrease rapidly during specimen transport, even at 4°C. Culture is therefore a relatively insensitive test for RSV. Non-culture methods perform well in comparison. Rapid non-culture tests used routinely to detect respiratory viruses include direct immunofluorescence assay (DFA) and anti-gen/enzyme assays employing solid membrane surfaces. Centrifugation-enhanced shell vials provide rapid culture detection of respiratory viruses. The DFA procedure utilizes fluorochrome (usually fluorescein isothiocyanate)-labeled monoclonal anti-bodies for the staining of viral antigens within infected cells. Following excitation, fluorochromes emit light at specific wavelengths. Fluorescein isothiocyanate appears apple green when excited by ultraviolet light. The DFA procedure can be performed on a variety of respiratory specimens including swabs …","PeriodicalId":22609,"journal":{"name":"The Johns Hopkins medical journal","volume":"19 1","pages":"126-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Johns Hopkins medical journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1309/E505-UL0Y-QX7A-JFMC","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

283 © The laboratory diagnosis of viral infections traditionally has been considered a lengthy process, providing results that may have minimal clinical impact. Specimens inoculated into cell culture tubes typically require incubation for several days prior to development of cytopathic effect or detection by methods such as hemadsorption. Culture tubes are often observed for 2 weeks or longer before reporting negative results. However, significant advances during the past 10 to 15 years in the development of viral diagnostic tests provide rapid and more useful results. Cell culture incubation times have been shortened significantly with the use of centrifugation enhanced shell vials. Methodologies that detect viral antigens or nucleic acids directly in patient specimens can be completed in minutes or hours. Decreased sensitivity and speci-ficity may accompany improved time to detection. The costs required to perform newer, rapid tests versus traditional culture methods are additional considerations. Rapid tests may have unique specimen requirements. All of these issues must be weighed carefully when considering which tests to offer. Respiratory Viruses Rapid tests have had more impact on the detection of respiratory viruses than any other group of viruses. Indeed, studies have demonstrated a number of positive outcomes of rapid detection of respiratory viruses in hospitalized patients, including decreased length of hospitalization, patient isolation, costs, and better use of antibiotics. 1,2 Respiratory viruses that are frequently identified by both traditional and rapid methods include influenza virus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), adenovirus, and parainfluenza virus. All of these viruses will grow in commonly available cell lines in tube cultures and are usually detectable after several days of incubation. However, influenza and parainfluenza viruses may not produce discernible cytopathic effect (CPE), requiring blind hemadsorption or immuno-fluorescence staining of cells. Respiratory syncytial virus is more labile than other respiratory viruses. Titers decrease rapidly during specimen transport, even at 4°C. Culture is therefore a relatively insensitive test for RSV. Non-culture methods perform well in comparison. Rapid non-culture tests used routinely to detect respiratory viruses include direct immunofluorescence assay (DFA) and anti-gen/enzyme assays employing solid membrane surfaces. Centrifugation-enhanced shell vials provide rapid culture detection of respiratory viruses. The DFA procedure utilizes fluorochrome (usually fluorescein isothiocyanate)-labeled monoclonal anti-bodies for the staining of viral antigens within infected cells. Following excitation, fluorochromes emit light at specific wavelengths. Fluorescein isothiocyanate appears apple green when excited by ultraviolet light. The DFA procedure can be performed on a variety of respiratory specimens including swabs …
病毒感染的快速诊断。
283©病毒感染的实验室诊断传统上被认为是一个漫长的过程,提供的结果可能具有最小的临床影响。将标本接种到细胞培养管中,通常需要孵育数天,然后才能产生细胞病变效应或通过血液吸附等方法进行检测。培养管通常观察2周或更长时间才报告阴性结果。然而,在过去10至15年中,病毒诊断测试的发展取得了重大进展,提供了快速和更有用的结果。细胞培养孵育时间已显著缩短与使用离心增强壳瓶。直接在患者标本中检测病毒抗原或核酸的方法可以在几分钟或几小时内完成。灵敏度和特异性的降低可能伴随着检测时间的延长。与传统培养方法相比,进行更新、快速测试所需的成本是另外需要考虑的问题。快速测试可能有独特的样品要求。在考虑提供哪些测试时,必须仔细权衡所有这些问题。呼吸道病毒快速检测在检测呼吸道病毒方面比其他任何一组病毒都有更大的影响。事实上,研究已经证明了在住院患者中快速检测呼吸道病毒的一些积极结果,包括缩短住院时间、隔离患者、降低费用和更好地使用抗生素。1,2通常通过传统和快速方法识别的呼吸道病毒包括流感病毒、呼吸道合胞病毒(RSV)、腺病毒和副流感病毒。所有这些病毒都会在试管培养中常见的细胞系中生长,通常在孵化几天后就可以检测到。然而,流感和副流感病毒可能不会产生可识别的细胞病变效应(CPE),需要对细胞进行盲血吸附或免疫荧光染色。呼吸道合胞病毒比其他呼吸道病毒更不稳定。在标本运输过程中,即使在4°C时,滴度也会迅速下降。因此,培养是一种相对不敏感的RSV检测方法。相比之下,非培养方法表现良好。常规用于检测呼吸道病毒的快速非培养试验包括直接免疫荧光试验(DFA)和采用固体膜表面的抗原/酶试验。离心增强壳瓶提供呼吸道病毒的快速培养检测。DFA程序利用荧光色素(通常是异硫氰酸荧光素)标记的单克隆抗体对感染细胞内的病毒抗原进行染色。激发后,荧光染料发出特定波长的光。异硫氰酸荧光素在紫外光激发下呈苹果绿。DFA程序可以在各种呼吸道标本上进行,包括拭子……
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