首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
检索        


Evaluation of four commercial systems for the diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus primary infections
Authors:de Ory Fernando  Guisasola María Eulalia  Sanz Juan Carlos  García-Bermejo Isabel
Institution:Servicio de Microbiología Diagnóstica, Centro Nacional de Microbiología, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain,1 Unidad de Microbiología Clínica, Laboratorio de Salud Pública de la Comunidad de Madrid, Madrid, Spain,2 Servicio de Microbiología, Hospital Universitario de Getafe, Getafe, Madrid, Spain3
Abstract:To compare the performance of four diagnostic commercial systems for Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) serology (for IgM and IgG virus capsid antigen VCA] and EBV nuclear antigen EBNA] antibodies), a collection of 125 samples from clinically suspected infectious mononucleosis cases was studied. Indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) for VCA IgM and IgG antibodies and anticomplement immunofluorescence for EBNA antibodies (Meridian Bioscience Inc.) were used as reference methods. By these methods, the cases were classified EBV primary infection (presence of IgM to VCA or IgG to VCA in the absence of EBNA antibodies; n = 82), EBV past infection (presence of VCA IgG and EBNA antibodies in the absence of VCA IgM; n = 26), or no infection (negative for the three markers; n = 17). The following systems were tested: two chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs; the Liason CLIA-L; DiaSorin] and the Immulite 2000 CLIA-I; Siemens]), immunofiltration (IF; All.Diag), and an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA; DiaSorin). In the IgM assays, sensitivities ranged from 67.1% (ELISA) to 92.2% (CLIA-L) and specificities ranged from 93.8% (CLIA-L) to 100% (IF). In the VCA IgG assays, sensitivities varied from 79.4% (IF) to 94.4% (CLIA-I) and specificities varied from 94.4% (IF and CLIA-L) to 100% (CLIA-I and ELISA). In EBNA assays, sensitivities ranged from 78.1% (IF) to 93.8% (CLIA-I) and specificities ranged from 32.3% (CLIA-L) to 91.4% (IF). In relation to EBV profiles, the corresponding figures for sensitivity (in detecting primary infection) for IF, CLIA-L, CLIA-I, and ELISA were 92.7%, 93.8%, 89%, and 89.6%, respectively, and those for specificity (to exclude primary recent infection) were 90.7%, 94.6%, 97.7%, and 95.2%, respectively. Although there were limitations in some individual markers, especially CLIA-L for EBNA IgG, the systems evaluated appear to be useful for diagnosis of EBV infection.
Keywords:
本文献已被 PubMed 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号