4.3 Article

Comparative evaluation of chemiluminescent immunoassay and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for the diagnosis of West Nile virus infections

期刊

APMIS
卷 130, 期 4, 页码 215-220

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apm.13207

关键词

Chemiluminescent immunoassay; enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays; serology; virology; West Nile virus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compared the agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of two different methods for detecting West Nile virus (WNV) infection. The results showed that the WNV VIRCLIA IgM and IgG monotest offers accurate detection of WNV in serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) specimens.
In August 2020, anew West Nile virus (WNV) outbreak affected 71 people with meningoencephalitis in Andalusia (Spain). Samples from these individuals were received in our laboratory, a regional Virus Referral Centre. The aim of this study was to compare the agreement, sensitivity and specificity of findings between the WNV VIRCLIA IgG and IgM assay (Vircell, Spain) and the WNV ELISA IgM and IgG assay (Euroimmun, Germany) and to compare the performance of WNV VIRCLIA IgM and Euroimmun ELISA for cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) diagnosis. The study included 24 CSF samples (paired with serum samples) and 247 serum samples from 217 patients with suspected WNV infection (1 or 2 per patient). The agreement between ELISA and CLIA tests for IgM and Ig G detection in serum was 93% (kappa index = 0.85) and 96% (kappa index = 0.89) respectively. Sensitivity values of ELISA and CLIA tests for IgM in serum samples were 96.7% and 98.9%, respectively, and specificity values were 96.4% and 95.4% respectively. Sensitivity values of ELISA and CLIA test for IgG in serum samples were 91.1% and 97%, respectively, and specificity values were 100% and 98.8% respectively. Results obtained with ELISA and CLIA tests in CSF samples showed 75% agreement between them (kappa index = 0.51). According to these findings, the WNV VIRCLIA IgM and IgG monotest offers an accurate qualitative detection of WNV in serum and CSF specimens.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据