This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dunn, J. J. Articles by Carroll, K. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Dunn, J. J. Articles by Carroll, K. C.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, May 2003, p. 2180-2183, Vol. 41, No. 5
0095-1137/03/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.41.5.2180-2183.2003
Copyright © 2003, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Comparison of the Denka-Seiken INFLU A·B-Quick and BD Directigen Flu A+B Kits with Direct Fluorescent-Antibody Staining and Shell Vial Culture Methods for Rapid Detection of Influenza Viruses

James J. Dunn,^1,2* Chris Gordon,¹ Christy Kelley,¹ and Karen C. Carroll^1,2,

ARUP Laboratories, Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah 84108,¹ Department of Pathology, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, Utah 84132²

Received 11 October 2002/ Returned for modification 29 December 2002/ Accepted 25 January 2003

The INFLU A·B-Quick and Directigen Flu A+B enzyme immunoassays were compared with direct immunofluorescence and cell culture for detection of influenza A and B viruses in a total of 255 patient specimens. Both assays identified 23 of 42 influenza A viruses (sensitivity, 54.8%; specificity, 100%; positive predictive value [PPV], 100%; negative predictive value [NPV], 91.8%). The INFLU A·B-Quick assay identified 10 of 16 influenza B viruses (sensitivity, 62.5%; specificity, 99.6%; PPV, 90.9%; NPV, 97.5%), and the Directigen Flu A+B assay detected 9 of 16 influenza B viruses (sensitivity, 56.3%; specificity, 99.6%; PPV, 90%; NPV, 97.1%).

Present address: Microbiology Division, Department of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD 21087-7093.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Perez-Ruiz, M., Yeste, R., Ruiz-Perez, M.-J., Ruiz-Bravo, A., de la Rosa-Fraile, M., Navarro-Mari, J. M. (2007). Testing of Diagnostic Methods for Detection of Influenza Virus for Optimal Performance in the Context of an Influenza Surveillance Network. J. Clin. Microbiol. 45: 3109-3110 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Leland, D. S., Ginocchio, C. C. (2007). Role of Cell Culture for Virus Detection in the Age of Technology. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 20: 49-78 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Agoritsas, K., Mack, K., Bonsu, B. K., Goodman, D., Salamon, D., Marcon, M. J. (2006). Evaluation of the Quidel QuickVue Test for Detection of Influenza A and B Viruses in the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Setting by Use of Three Specimen Collection Methods.. J. Clin. Microbiol. 44: 2638-2641 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Fader, R. C. (2005). Comparison of the Binax NOW Flu A Enzyme Immunochromatographic Assay and R-Mix Shell Vial Culture for the 2003-2004 Influenza Season. J. Clin. Microbiol. 43: 6133-6135 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Weinberg, A., Walker, M. L. (2005). Evaluation of Three Immunoassay Kits for Rapid Detection of Influenza Virus A and B. CVI 12: 367-370 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Dunn, J. J., Woolstenhulme, R. D., Langer, J., Carroll, K. C. (2004). Sensitivity of Respiratory Virus Culture When Screening with R-Mix Fresh Cells. J. Clin. Microbiol. 42: 79-82 [Abstract] [Full Text]