[Morphological virus diagnosis].

G S Kistler

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 884363

[Morphological virus diagnosis].

G S Kistler

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Morphological virus diagnosis is based on the detection of pathological changes in organs, tissues and cells at the macroscopic, lightmicroscopic and/or ultrastructural levels. Cytopathic effects may be caused directly by virus replication or be secondary in nature. A number of morphological methods with different degrees of specificity are available for the demonstration of virus particles and viral antigens. Examples are presented and the most important morphological characteristics of the viruses of the major groups are summarized.

Explore related subjects

Cytopathogenic Effect, Viral Humans Microscopy, Electron Virus Diseases Virus Replication Viruses English Abstract Journal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

G S Kistler. 1977. [Morphological virus diagnosis].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/884363/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

The surgical and cytopathology of viral infections: utility of immunohistochemistry, in situ hybridization, and in situ polymerase chain reaction amplification.

The diagnosis of viral infections is an important part of the daily work of a surgical and cytopathologist. Some viral infections, such as human papillomavirus infection of the lower genital tract, are seen commonly, whereas others, such as fatal enteroviral infection, cannot be diagnosed on routine histological examination and need to be addressed within the clinical context. In general, viral infections are best categorized for the surgical pathologist as low copy/RNA viruses and high copy/DNA viruses. In the latter, viral DNA enters the nucleus, undergoes rapid proliferation, and causes certain cytopathologic changes characteristic of the infection. Immunohistochemistry and/or in situ hybridization yields an intense signal, reflective of the productive infection. In comparison, RNA viruses typically do not show high copy numbers and, although they can induce characteristic cytopathologic changes such as inclusions, often times they do not. In such cases, immunohistochemistry and/or in situ-based hybridization methods, particularly in situ polymerase chain reaction amplification, may be required for a definitive diagnosis. A combination of routine histopathology, clinical information, and immunohistochemistry/in situ-based nucleic acid detection methodologies will allow the surgical pathologist to correctly diagnose viral infections.

Cytopathogenic Effect, Viral↗

PubMed2003

Viral induced fusion and syncytium formation: measurement by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistical test.

Fusion and syncytium formation induced by the expression of fusogenic viral glycoproteins are common cytopathic effects. Numerous laboratories have studied mechanisms of fusion, generally with each laboratory utilizing a different method to measure polykaryote formation. There is little consensus as to which methods are preferred for measuring and comparing fusion. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov two-sample test was used to document a statistical difference in syncytium formation between two forms of a varicella-zoster virus (VZV) fusogenic glycoprotein. This test is widely applied toward the analysis of large human populations in which interest centers on testing the hypothesis that the distributions of two sub-populations are identical. We suggest that the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test is a preferable method to assess whether differences in distribution of syncytia size between two fusogenic glycoproteins are meaningful statistically.

Cytopathogenic Effect, Viral↗

PubMed2002

Cytological modifications in maize plants infected by barley yellow dwarf virus and maize dwarf mosaic virus.

Three inbred lines of maize (33-16, MO17 and B73) differing in their susceptibility to Barley yellow dwarf virus and Maize dwarf mosaic virus were studied to compare the ultrastructural modifications induced by the two viruses in leaf tissues of different age. The results demonstrate that the alterations induced by the two viruses in the different maize lines could depend on the particular line tested.

Cytopathogenic Effect, Viral↗