B. Pozzetto, A.D. Mbida, T. Bourlet, F. Grattard, L. Bonnevial
{"title":"eb病毒特异性或非特异性血清学诊断传染性单核细胞增多症的8种商用检测方法的比较评价","authors":"B. Pozzetto, A.D. Mbida, T. Bourlet, F. Grattard, L. Bonnevial","doi":"10.1016/S0888-0786(96)01063-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Eight commercially-available tests were compared for the diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated infectious mononucleosis (IM). They consisted in four slide agglutination assays (one of them using horse erythrocytes and three of them latex beads coated with purified bovine erythrocyte antigen), in a classical Paul-Bunnell-Davidsohn (PBD) tube-test using sheep erythrocytes, and in three assays intended to detect EBV-specific IgM antibodies either by indirect immunofluourescence (one test) or by ELISA (two tests). Sixty serum specimens from patients with symptoms compatible with IM were selected on the following criteria: presence of EBV-specific IgM by at least 2 of the 3 specific assays and absence or very low titres (≤5) of antibodies to EBV nuclear antigen (EBNA). Using this panel of positive samples, the sensitivity of the 8 assays ranged from 55 to 100%. The EBV-specific IgM tests exhibited the higher sensitivities, especially the one using a combination of peptides directed to different viral antigens. Whereas the PBD tuve test was shown to be time-consuming and insensitive, even in young adults, the slide agglutination tests were easy to perform and exhibited sensitivities ranging from 70 to 80%. The latter tests represent a good alternative to EBV-specific serology for the rapid diagnosis of IM; however, in case of negativity, an EBV specific testing must be done, especially in children under 5 years.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101161,"journal":{"name":"Serodiagnosis and Immunotherapy in Infectious Disease","volume":"8 3","pages":"Pages 221-223"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0888-0786(96)01063-3","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of eight commercial tests for the diagnosis of infectious mononucleosis by Epstein-Barr virus-specific or -non specific serology\",\"authors\":\"B. Pozzetto, A.D. Mbida, T. Bourlet, F. Grattard, L. Bonnevial\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S0888-0786(96)01063-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Eight commercially-available tests were compared for the diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated infectious mononucleosis (IM). They consisted in four slide agglutination assays (one of them using horse erythrocytes and three of them latex beads coated with purified bovine erythrocyte antigen), in a classical Paul-Bunnell-Davidsohn (PBD) tube-test using sheep erythrocytes, and in three assays intended to detect EBV-specific IgM antibodies either by indirect immunofluourescence (one test) or by ELISA (two tests). Sixty serum specimens from patients with symptoms compatible with IM were selected on the following criteria: presence of EBV-specific IgM by at least 2 of the 3 specific assays and absence or very low titres (≤5) of antibodies to EBV nuclear antigen (EBNA). Using this panel of positive samples, the sensitivity of the 8 assays ranged from 55 to 100%. The EBV-specific IgM tests exhibited the higher sensitivities, especially the one using a combination of peptides directed to different viral antigens. Whereas the PBD tuve test was shown to be time-consuming and insensitive, even in young adults, the slide agglutination tests were easy to perform and exhibited sensitivities ranging from 70 to 80%. The latter tests represent a good alternative to EBV-specific serology for the rapid diagnosis of IM; however, in case of negativity, an EBV specific testing must be done, especially in children under 5 years.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101161,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Serodiagnosis and Immunotherapy in Infectious Disease\",\"volume\":\"8 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 221-223\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0888-0786(96)01063-3\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Serodiagnosis and Immunotherapy in Infectious Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0888078696010633\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Serodiagnosis and Immunotherapy in Infectious Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0888078696010633","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative evaluation of eight commercial tests for the diagnosis of infectious mononucleosis by Epstein-Barr virus-specific or -non specific serology
Eight commercially-available tests were compared for the diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated infectious mononucleosis (IM). They consisted in four slide agglutination assays (one of them using horse erythrocytes and three of them latex beads coated with purified bovine erythrocyte antigen), in a classical Paul-Bunnell-Davidsohn (PBD) tube-test using sheep erythrocytes, and in three assays intended to detect EBV-specific IgM antibodies either by indirect immunofluourescence (one test) or by ELISA (two tests). Sixty serum specimens from patients with symptoms compatible with IM were selected on the following criteria: presence of EBV-specific IgM by at least 2 of the 3 specific assays and absence or very low titres (≤5) of antibodies to EBV nuclear antigen (EBNA). Using this panel of positive samples, the sensitivity of the 8 assays ranged from 55 to 100%. The EBV-specific IgM tests exhibited the higher sensitivities, especially the one using a combination of peptides directed to different viral antigens. Whereas the PBD tuve test was shown to be time-consuming and insensitive, even in young adults, the slide agglutination tests were easy to perform and exhibited sensitivities ranging from 70 to 80%. The latter tests represent a good alternative to EBV-specific serology for the rapid diagnosis of IM; however, in case of negativity, an EBV specific testing must be done, especially in children under 5 years.