RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Serological diagnosis of infections due to measles and rubella viruses is done by IgM detection. The aim of this study was to comparatively evaluate commercial systems for detecting IgM against both viruses, including those of ELISA, in indirect and capture formats, chemiluminescence and electrochemiluminescence. METHODS: Seven (for rubella) and six (for measles) assays were studied. One hundred and sixty two samples were included in the study (from 90 rubella and 72 measles cases), and all were analyzed in all the assays. RESULTS: The ranges of sensitivity, specificity and agreement for rubella were 94.8-100%, 52.4-100% and 75.5-98.1%, respectively. The corresponding ranges for measles assays were 87.0-100%, 53.3-100%, and 73.0-99.4%. CONCLUSION: The best-performing assays were chemiluminescence (for measles and rubella IgM), and electrochemiluminescence (for rubella IgM).
Asunto(s)
Sarampión , Rubéola (Sarampión Alemán) , Anticuerpos Antivirales , Humanos , Inmunoglobulina M , Sarampión/diagnóstico , Virus del Sarampión , Rubéola (Sarampión Alemán)/diagnósticoRESUMEN
BackgroundSerological diagnosis of infections due to measles and rubella viruses is done by IgM detection. The aim of this study was to comparatively evaluate commercial systems for detecting IgM against both viruses, including those of ELISA, in indirect and capture formats, chemiluminescence and electrochemiluminescence.MethodsSeven (for rubella) and six (for measles) assays were studied. One hundred and sixty two samples were included in the study (from 90 rubella and 72 measles cases), and all were analyzed in all the assays.ResultsThe ranges of sensitivity, specificity and agreement for rubella were 94.8100%, 52.4100% and 75.598.1%, respectively. The corresponding ranges for measles assays were 87.0100%, 53.3100%, and 73.099.4%.ConclusionThe best-performing assays were chemiluminescence (for measles and rubella IgM), and electrochemiluminescence (for rubella IgM).
El diagnóstico serológico de las infecciones por los virus de la rubéola y del sarampión se realiza por detección de IgM específica. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar comparativamente sistemas comerciales para la detección de IgM frente a ambos virus, incluyendo ensayos de ELISA, tanto con metodologías indirectas como de captura, así como quimioluminiscencia y electroquimioluminiscencia.MétodosSe estudiaron 7 ensayos para rubéola y 6 para sarampión. Se emplearon 162 muestras (de 90 casos de rubéola y de 72 de sarampión) que se analizaron en todos los ensayos.ResultadosLos rangos de sensibilidad, especificidad y concordancia para los ensayos de rubéola fueron 94,8-100%, 52,4-100% y 75,5-98,1%, respectivamente. Los rangos correspondientes para los ensayos de sarampión fueron 87-100%, 53,3-100% y 73-99,4%, respectivamente.ConclusiónLos mejores ensayos fueron quimioluminiscencia (para IgM frente a rubéola y a sarampión) y electroquimioluminiscencia (para IgM frente a rubéola).
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Ciencias de la Salud , Benchmarking , Inmunoglobulina M , Virus de la Rubéola , Sarampión , Técnicas para Inmunoenzimas , Inmunoensayo de Polarización Fluorescente , Microbiología , Pruebas SerológicasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Serological diagnosis of infections due to measles and rubella viruses is done by IgM detection. The aim of this study was to comparatively evaluate commercial systems for detecting IgM against both viruses, including those of ELISA, in indirect and capture formats, chemiluminescence and electrochemiluminescence. METHODS: Seven (for rubella) and six (for measles) assays were studied. One hundred and sixty two samples were included in the study (from 90 rubella and 72 measles cases), and all were analyzed in all the assays. RESULTS: The ranges of sensitivity, specificity and agreement for rubella were 94.8-100%, 52.4-100% and 75.5-98.1%, respectively. The corresponding ranges for measles assays were 87.0-100%, 53.3-100%, and 73.0-99.4%. CONCLUSION: The best-performing assays were chemiluminescence (for measles and rubella IgM), and electrochemiluminescence (for rubella IgM).
RESUMEN
The aim of this study is to evaluate the performance characteristics of the LIAISON XL Zika Capture IgM II. For this purpose we tested 128 samples obtained from recent infections caused by the Zika (ZIKV; 74 samples), dengue (DENV; 10 samples), chikungunya (CHIK V; 11 samples), rubella (RUBV; 10 samples) and measles (MeV; 10 samples) viruses, as well as human parvovirus B19 (HPVB19; 13 samples). The results of the assay under evaluation are compared with those obtained from an indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) assay, and the discrepancies are resolved by considering other laboratory results (PCR and a plaque-reduction neutralization test). The LIAISON showed excellent sensitivity (100%). The specificity (91.25%) was hampered by some false-positive results in recent dengue virus, chikungunya virus, measles virus and human parvovirus B19 infections. The method evaluated is adequate, but the low specificity makes it necessary to consider the clinical and epidemiological contexts of patients, as well as other laboratory results.
