PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

E Terletskaia-Ladwig

Publications and source records attributed to E Terletskaia-Ladwig.

4 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

[Rational and efficient enterovirus diagnosis].

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Demonstration of the causative pathogen by isolating the virus in cell culture is taken as the standard in the diagnosis of diseases caused by enterovirus. When diagnosing the virus in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), isolation of the virus has been largely replaced by the rapid demonstration of the virus using the reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), because of its greater sensitivity. The serological diagnosis is mostly made with the complement binding reaction (CBR). A new enzyme immunoassay for demonstrating anti-enterovirus IGM antibodies (IgM-EIA) allows a more rapid diagnosis from a single serum sample. It was the aim of this study to compare the diagnostic value of these various tests. METHODS: Several methods for demonstrating virus from faeces, swabs and CSF (virus isolation in cell culture and RT-PCR) and of antibodies in serum (IgM-EIA and CBR) were compared. The clinical material was obtained largely from children under the age of 10 years, many of whom had serous meningitis, flu-like symptoms or enteritis. In one cohort (C1), only stool or throat swabs were available for each of 154 patients. In the other cohort (C2) of 164 patients, CSF and at least one serum sample were available in addition to occasional stool samples. RESULTS: From C1 enteroviruses were isolated from 32 patients. rotavirus twice from stool or throat swab and rotavirus once from stool or throat swab, and herpes simplex once from throat swab. RT-PCR was positive 55 times for enterovirus, five times false-negative when the virus had been isolated. In C2 enterovirus nucleic acid was demonstrated in 43 patients from CSF. Parallel serological tests gave positive IgM values for 15 patients, while CBR titres were raised in nine. CONCLUSIONS: Complementary tests of CSF, stool, swabs and serum samples by all possible combinations of viral isolation, RT-PCR and IgM-EIA improve the diagnosis of enterovirus-associated diseases. RT-PCR is the method of choice. The serological diagnosis should be confirmed by the demonstration of virus in stool or swab.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Evaluation of enterovirus serological tests IgM-EIA and complement fixation in patients with meningitis, confirmed by detection of enteroviral RNA by RT-PCR in cerebrospinal fluid.

An enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for detection of anti-enterovirus IgM antibodies was compared with complement fixation test in 43 patients with confirmed enterovirus meningitis by RT-PCR of cerebrospinal fluids (CSF). In 34% of patients with enterovirus meningitis, IgM antibodies could be found, whereas complement fixation tests were positive in only 20%. The specificity was determined with sera of 105 patients with non-enterovirus meningitis. Specificity of IgM EIA and of complement fixation was 94% and 85%, respectively. In four patients with meningitis but without enterovirus detection in CSF, RT-PCR and virus isolation from stools were positive. In three of these patients, IgM antibodies were detected, giving a strong indication of an enterovirus-associated disease. Because of the high specificity of IgM EIA, diagnosis of enterovirus-associated diseases can be carried out in a single serum sample, whereas by complement fixation tests, only fourfold increases in antibody titres in paired sera indicate an acute infection. The application of IgM EIA is especially important in cases of meningitis when CSF samples are not available and for diagnosis of enterovirus diseases with other clinical symptoms such as fever, enteritis, and hand-foot-and-mouth disease.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

A new enzyme immunoassay for the detection of enteroviruses in faecal specimens.

A new enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for direct detection of enteroviruses based on a group-specific monoclonal antibody was evaluated using stool samples from patients with suspected enteroviral infection. The EIA was compared with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and virus isolation in cell culture. Of 204 samples tested, 20 were positive by EIA, 34 by PCR, and 18 by cell culture. Compared with PCR, the most sensitive method, the sensitivity of EIA was 58% (20/34); the sensitivity of cell culture isolation was 52% (18/34). The results of both assays correlated in only 60% of cases. The combination of EIA and cell culture isolation detected 76% of PCR-positive stool samples. Enterovirus EIA provides results within 3-4 hr and requires only standard EIA equipment. It represents a rapid, reliable, and cost-effective diagnostic tool for enterovirus diagnosis from faecal samples. Negative results must be confirmed by other techniques, such as PCR or virus isolation in cell culture.

Adult↗