Publication:
Comparative evaluation of tests for detection of parvovirus B19 IgG and IgM

dc.contributor.authorFuertes, Antonio
dc.contributor.authorDe Ory, Fernando de
dc.contributor.authorMinguito, Teodora
dc.contributor.authorEchevarria, Juan Emilio
dc.contributor.authorMosquera Gutierrez, Maria del Mar
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-16T08:32:45Z
dc.date.available2020-06-16T08:32:45Z
dc.date.issued2014-03
dc.description.abstractThe aim of this study was to evaluate enzyme immunoassays (EIA) (Euroimmun, Lübeck, Germany) and chemiluminiscent immunoassays (CLIA) (Diasorin, Saluggia, Italy) in their application to detect B19V-IgM and -IgG. For this purpose, one hundred and ninety samples were studied. Of them, 101 came from recent infection cases (B19V-specific IgM (86) and/or PCR (87), 42 from past infections, 18 from non-infected, and 29 from other viral recent infections (Epstein-Barr virus, measles, and rubella). Samples were characterized by capture (for IgM), or indirect (for IgG) EIA (Biotrin, Dublin, Ireland); indeterminate samples were classified by indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) (Biotrin). All the samples were used for testing IgM assays, and all but the cases from other viral infections were used for IgG tests. For IgM, CLIA, and EIA identified 76 and 62 of 86 IgM positives, respectively (sensitivity 88.4% and 72.1%). Considering B19V IgM negative samples, negative result was obtained in 95 and 92 of 104, being the specificity values of CLIA and EIA 91.3% and 88.5%, respectively. For IgG, CLIA and EIA identified correctly 114 and 115 of the 122 positive samples (sensitivity 93.4% and 94.3%, respectively), and 39 and 36 of 39 negative samples (specificity 100% and 92.3%). As conclusion, CLIA methods can be used in clinical laboratories as adequate alternatives to the well-established Biotrin EIAs.es_ES
dc.description.peerreviewedes_ES
dc.format.number3es_ES
dc.format.page223-9es_ES
dc.format.volume122es_ES
dc.identifier.citationAPMIS . 2014 Mar;122(3):223-9.es_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/apm.12127es_ES
dc.identifier.e-issn1600-0463es_ES
dc.identifier.journalAPMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavicaes_ES
dc.identifier.pubmedID23763266es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12105/10447
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherWiley
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://doi.org/10.1111/apm.12127es_ES
dc.repisalud.centroISCIII::Centro Nacional de Microbiologíaes_ES
dc.repisalud.institucionISCIIIes_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.rights.licenseAtribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/*
dc.subject.meshAntibodies, Virales_ES
dc.subject.meshEpstein-Barr Virus Infectionses_ES
dc.subject.meshFluorescent Antibody Technique, Indirectes_ES
dc.subject.meshHumanses_ES
dc.subject.meshImmunoenzyme Techniqueses_ES
dc.subject.meshImmunoglobulin Ges_ES
dc.subject.meshImmunoglobulin Mes_ES
dc.subject.meshMeasleses_ES
dc.subject.meshParvoviridae Infectionses_ES
dc.subject.meshParvovirus B19, Humanes_ES
dc.subject.meshRubellaes_ES
dc.titleComparative evaluation of tests for detection of parvovirus B19 IgG and IgMes_ES
dc.typeresearch articlees_ES
dc.type.hasVersionAMes_ES
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication3934227c-f6db-420f-b986-334b16d5221a
relation.isAuthorOfPublication26a56bc6-4e8c-457c-8999-13fd4d2bed1a
relation.isAuthorOfPublication5c7d63f5-f2f7-4056-a081-af18221680be
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationaeffe7c8-0ea1-454d-a37e-4fb23d9ad9ad
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery3934227c-f6db-420f-b986-334b16d5221a
relation.isPublisherOfPublicationd81e762a-95f7-4917-88a1-8004b3b8caa7
relation.isPublisherOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryd81e762a-95f7-4917-88a1-8004b3b8caa7

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
ComparativeEvaluationOfTests_2013.pdf
Size:
381.01 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: