RAPID CULTURE FOR INFLUENZA-VIRUS, TYPE-A AND TYPE-B, IN 96-WELL PLATES

Citation
Bg. Brumback et al., RAPID CULTURE FOR INFLUENZA-VIRUS, TYPE-A AND TYPE-B, IN 96-WELL PLATES, Clinical and diagnostic virology, 4(3), 1995, pp. 251-256
Citations number
8
Categorie Soggetti
Virology
ISSN journal
09280197
Volume
4
Issue
3
Year of publication
1995
Pages
251 - 256
Database
ISI
SICI code
0928-0197(1995)4:3<251:RCFITA>2.0.ZU;2-A
Abstract
Background: Rapid diagnosis and typing of influenza virus are importan t for patient treatment and management during seasonal outbreaks. Cent rifugation-enhanced rapid culture has been reported to be useful as an adjunct to traditional tube culture for rapid diagnosis of influenza virus. Objectives: We compared rapid culture in 96-well plates against standard tube culture for recovery of influenza virus, types A and B. We also tested two different cell types, MDCK and RMK, to determine i f the use of multiple cell lines increases the sensitivity of rapid cu lture. Study design: The rapid method was initially evaluated by retro spective culture of previously positive frozen specimens. It was then compared to standard culture for recovery of influenza virus by parall el testing of fresh respiratory specimens. Results: Of 32 previously p ositive frozen specimens, 28 were positive upon repeat culture. Rapid culture recovered 25 (89.3%) and standard culture recovered 23 (82.1%) . All positives were type A. Of 722 fresh specimens cultured in parall el, 76 (10.5%) were positive for influenza virus: 43 for type A and 33 for type B. For type A, rapid culture recovered 42 of 43 (97.7%) and tube culture recovered 39 (90.7%). For type B, rapid culture recovered 33 of 33 (100%) and tube culture recovered 24 (72.7%). In the rapid s ystem, the MDCK cell line was positive for 40 of 42 type A positives ( 95.2%) and the RMK was positive for 41 (97.6%). The MDCK line was posi tive for 32 of the 33 type B isolates (97.0%) and the RMK cells were p ositive for all 33 (100%). Conclusions: Rapid culture substantially se duced total test time and was more sensitive than tube culture. Duplic ate cell lines did not significantly increase test sensitivity.