JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow A correction has been published
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sambourg, M
Right arrow Articles by Denis, F
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sambourg, M
Right arrow Articles by Denis, F

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

J Clin Microbiol. 1985 April; 21(4): 622-625

Direct appraisal of latex agglutination testing, a convenient alternative to enzyme immunoassay for the detection of rotavirus in childhood gastroenteritis, by comparison of two enzyme immunoassays and two latex tests.

M Sambourg, A Goudeau, C Courant, G Pinon and F Denis

ABSTRACT

During February and March 1984, 207 fecal samples from infants and children with gastroenteritis were tested for rotavirus with four techniques: two enzyme immunoassays (Rotazyme; Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, Ill., and Enzygnost-Rotavirus; Calbiochem-Behring, La Jolla, Calif.) and two latex agglutination tests (Rotalex; Orion Research, Inc., Cambridge, Mass., and Slidex Rota-Kit; Biomérieux). All stool samples were also tested for yeasts and bacterial pathogens. Electron microscopy was used to investigate discrepant results. We found 47% positive samples with Enzygnost-Rotavirus, 38% with Rotazyme, 37% with Slidex Rota-Kit, and 34% with Rotalex. No specimen was found positive by Rotazyme only or Slidex Rota-Kit only. On the contrary, 12 samples which were positive with Enzygnost-Rotavirus only and 3 which were positive with Rotalex only were not confirmed as positive by electron microscopy. Both enzyme immunoassays gave 6% equivocal results; Slidex Rota-Kit gave significantly fewer equivocal results than did Rotalex: 2.9% versus 9.7% (P less than 0.01). The sensitivity and specificity of latex tests compared favorably with that of enzyme immunoassays. Latex agglutination tests can be performed by unskilled personnel and are rapid and relatively cheap. They appear to be very suitable for routine laboratory work and may prove useful for large-scale screening in developing countries.


J Clin Microbiol. 1985 April; 21(4): 622-625







Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 1985 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.