Abstract
A comparison between a direct immunofluorescence assay (DFA) and the shell-vial culture (SVC) was conducted to evaluate their efficacies according to the quality and origin of the sample and the type of herpes simplex (HSV) responsible for the infection. The SVC detected all 58 HSV-infected samples, while the DFA detected only 49 (84.5%) positive samples. The DFA detected HSV type 1 in 22 of 89 samples (24.7%) and HSV type 2 in 27 of 96 samples (28.1%). Compared with the SVC, the DFA had a sensitivity of 75.8% for HSV type 1 and 93.1 % for HSV type 2. The sensitivity of the DFA depends on the quality of the sample. Thus, while DFA is recommendable as a screening method, the SVC remains the method of choice for obtaining the maximum diagnostic yield from the sample.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Rawls HE: Herpes simplex viruses: types 1 and 2. In: Lennette EH (ed): Laboratory diagnosis of viral infections. Marcel Dekker, New York, 1992, p. 443–475.
Whitley RJ, Gnann JW: The epidemiology and clinical manifestations of herpes simplex virus infection. In: Roizman B, Whitley RJ, Lopez C (ed): The human herpesviruses. Raven Press, New York, 1993, p. 69–105.
Whitley RJ: Herpes simplex viruses. In: Fields BN, Knipe DM, Howley PM (ed): Fields virology. Lippincott-Raven Press, Philadelphia, 1996, p. 2297–2342.
Balachandran N, Franme B, Chernesky M, Kraiselburd E, Kouri Y, Garcia D, Lavery C, Rawls WE: Identification and typing of herpes simplex viruses with monoclonal antibodies. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1982, 16: 205–208.
Goldstein LC, Corey L, McDougall JK, Tolentino E, Nowinski RC: Monoclonal antibodies to herpes simplex virus: use in antigenic typing and rapid diagnosis. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1983, 147: 829–837.
Fung JC, Shanley J, Tilton RC: Comparison of the detection of herpes simplex virus in direct clinical specimens with herpes simplex virus-specific DNA probes and monoclonal antibodies. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1985, 22: 748–753.
Hoffmann BE, Jungkind DL, Haller GJ, Sharrar R, Baker RA, Weisberg M: Evaluation of two rapid methods for the detection of herpes simplex virus antigen in patient specimens. Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Sciences 1985, 15: 418–427.
Mosley RC, Corey L, Benjamin D, Winter D, Remington ML: Comparison of viral isolation, direct immunofluorescence, and indirect immunoperoxidase techniques for detection of genital herpes simplex virus infection. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1981, 13: 913–918.
Schmidt NJ, Dennis J, Devlin V, Gallo D, Mills J: Comparison of direct immunofluorescence and direct immunoperoxidase procedures for detection of herpes simplex virus antigen in lesion specimens. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1983, 18: 445–448.
Pouletty P, Chomel JJ, Thouvenot D, Catalan F, Rabillon V, Kadouche J: Detection of herpes simplex virus in direct specimens by immunofluorescence assay using a monoclonal antibody. Journai of Clinical Microbiology 1987, 25: 958–959.
Landry ML, Ferguson D, Wlochowski J: Detection of herpes simplex virus in clinical specimens by cytospinenhanced direct immunofluorescence. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1997, 35: 302–304.
Gerna G, Revello MG, Percivalle E, Morini F: Comparison of different immunostaining techniques and monoclonal antibodies to the lower matrix phosphoprotein (pp65) for optimal quantitation of human cytomegalovirus antigenemia. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1992, 30: 1232–1237.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Reina, J., Saurina, J., Fernandez-Baca, V. et al. Evaluation of a direct immunofluorescence cytospin assay for the detection of herpes simplex virus in clinical samples. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 16, 851–854 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01700419
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01700419