ACLS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
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 arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Drews, S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Low, D. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Drews, S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Low, D. E.
Annals of Clinical & Laboratory Science 38:376-379 (2008)
© 2008 Association of Clinical Scientists

Use of the Seeplex RV Detection Kit for Surveillance of Respiratory Viral Outbreaks in Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Steven J. Drews1,2,3, Joanne Blair1, Ernesto Lombos1, Cedric DeLima1, Laura Burton1, Tony Mazzulli1,2,3 and Donald E. Low1,2,3
1 Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, Public Health Laboratories Branch, Etobicoke, Ontario; 2 Department of Microbiology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario; 3 Department of Laboratory Medicine & Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Address correspondence to Dr. Steven J. Drews, Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, Public Health Laboratories Branch, 81 Resources Rd., Etobicoke, Ontario M9P 3T1, Canada; tel 416 235 5703; fax 416 235 6550; e-mail steven. drews{at}ontario.ca.

The Seeplex® RV Detection kit was used to identify specific respiratory viruses from specimens collected during respiratory outbreaks in the Greater Toronto Area from 1 September 2007 to 1 February 2008. Two hundred-thirty-one patient samples (nasopharyngeal swabs) were collected from 63 respiratory outbreaks. The distribution of outbreaks characterized by molecular means was: 30% (n = 19) no identification; 52.5% (n = 33) one pathogen; 14.5% (n = 9) two pathogens; and 3% (n = 2) three pathogens. In contrast, culture-based protocols identified pathogens in fewer outbreaks: 63 % (n = 40) no identification; 35% (n = 22) 1 pathogen; and 2% (n = 1) 2 pathogens (p < 0.05). Compared to virus isolation, molecular testing identified a greater proportion of positive specimens for rhinovirus: 22% (n = 51/231) vs 5% (n = 12/231) (p = 0.01); and RSV A/B: 12% (n = 27/231) vs 5% (n = 11/231) (p < 0.05). Superiority of the molecular assay to detect rhinovirus and RSV outbreaks compared to culture is evident from this study.

Keywords: respiratory viruses, multiplex RT-PCR, viral culture, infection surveillance, rhinovirus, RSV




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Annals of Clinical & Laboratory ScienceHome page
S. Bolotin, C. De Lima, K.-W. Choi, E. Lombos, L. Burton, T. Mazzulli, and S. J. Drews
Validation of the TaqMan Influenza A Detection Kit and a Rapid Automated Total Nucleic Acid Extraction Method to Detect Influenza A Virus in Nasopharyngeal Specimens
Ann. Clin. Lab. Sci., January 1, 2009; 39(2): 155 - 159.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the Association of Clinical Scientists.