4.7 Article

Monitoring of Herpes Simplex Virus DNA Types 1 and 2 Viral Load in Cerebrospinal Fluid by Real-Time PCR in Patients With Herpes Simplex Encephalitis

Journal

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY
Volume 81, Issue 8, Pages 1432-1437

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.21563

Keywords

quantitative PCR; herpes simplex virus (HSV); encephalitis; cerebrospinal fluid

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay was evaluated retrospectively on 92 cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples from 29 patients with herpes simplex virus (HSV) encephalitis with the aim to study if the concentration of HSV genomes can be used as a prognostic marker and for monitoring of antiviral therapy. The results were compared to those obtained previously by nested PCR, and the numbers of HSV genomes/ml were evaluated in correlation to patient outcome and treatment. The aims were to compare the sensitivity of a conventional nested PCR to a quantitative PCR, to investigate the range of HSV genome concentration in initial samples and to evaluate possible relationships between the HSV DNA concentrations in CSF, neopterin levels, and outcome of disease. The 29 initial samples contained between 2 x 102 and 42 x 106 HSV genomes/ml. There was no apparent correlation between the amount of HSV DNA in the initial samples and income status, initial neopterin levels, or prognosis. The number of HSV genomes/ml declined after treatment in all patients, but HSV DNA was still detectable after day 20 in 3 out of 16 patients. A long duration of genome detectability was found to correlate with poor outcome. There was no difference in sensitivity between the nested PCR and the quantitative PCR. While the quantitative PCR is more rational than a nested PCR, the quantitation of HSV genomes does not seem very useful as a prognostic marker in HSV encephalitis. J. Med. Virol. 81:1432-1437, 2009. (C) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available