Evaluation of third-generation ELISA and a rapid immunochromatographic assay for the detection of norovirus infection in fecal samples from inpatients of a German tertiary care hospital
被引:26
作者:
Geginat, G.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Univ Klinikum Magdeburg, Inst Med Mikrobiol, D-39120 Magdeburg, GermanyUniv Klinikum Magdeburg, Inst Med Mikrobiol, D-39120 Magdeburg, Germany
Geginat, G.
[1
]
Kaiser, D.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Heidelberg Univ, Fak Klin Med Mannheim, Inst Med Mikrobiol & Hyg, D-68167 Mannheim, GermanyUniv Klinikum Magdeburg, Inst Med Mikrobiol, D-39120 Magdeburg, Germany
Kaiser, D.
[2
]
Schrempf, S.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
R Biopharm AG, D-64297 Darmstadt, GermanyUniv Klinikum Magdeburg, Inst Med Mikrobiol, D-39120 Magdeburg, Germany
Schrempf, S.
[3
]
机构:
[1] Univ Klinikum Magdeburg, Inst Med Mikrobiol, D-39120 Magdeburg, Germany
[2] Heidelberg Univ, Fak Klin Med Mannheim, Inst Med Mikrobiol & Hyg, D-68167 Mannheim, Germany
The analytical accuracy of the RIDASCREEN Norovirus 3rd Generation ELISA assay and the rapid immunochromatographic RIDAQUICK Norovirus assay were determined in comparison to PCR. In a prospective study 410 consecutive samples were collected from inpatients of a tertiary care hospital in Germany. All samples were tested with the two antigen detection assays, as well as with three different real-time reverse transcription PCR methods as the reference standard. A sample was considered true-positive if at least 2 out of 3 PCR methods yielded a positive signal (137 positive samples, > 99% genogroup II). Compared with the PCR-based reference the overall diagnostic sensitivities of the ELISA and the immunochromatographic assay were 77% and 69% and the diagnostic specificities were 96% and 97% respectively. Both assays allow the rapid and economic screening of large numbers of samples and thus are useful diagnostic tools for the detection of suspected norovirus infections.