Evaluation of diagnostic methods for the detection of pestiviruses in clinical samples

5Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

There are several commonly used diagnostic methods to detect pestiviruses for routine diagnostic purposes. In the present study, we aimed to compare virus isolation-indirect immunoperoxidase monolayer assay (VI-IIPMA), antigen capture ELISA (ACE), and RT-PCR for the detection of pestiviruses in clinical samples. Out of 246 samples tested (11 serum, 119 swab, 116 tissue), 28 samples (11.39%) were positive and 218 (88.61%) were negative using the VI-IIPMA method. Using ACE, 70 samples (28.46%) were positive and 176 (71.54%) were negative. Finally, using RT-PCR analysis, we detected 19 (7.72%) positive and 227 (92.28%) negative samples. Inconsistencies were observed among results of the three methods: 8 samples were positive using VI-IIPMA but negative using ACE and RT-PCR. In addition, 4 samples that were found to be negative by VI-IIPMA were found to be positive by ACE and RT-PCR. Five samples were positive by ACE and VI-IIPMA. However, 46 samples were found to be positive only by ACE. These results show that the number of positive results detected by ACE is higher than that by VI-IIPMA and RT-PCR. Although ACE may prove advantageous for diagnosing pestiviruses, using a second method in combination with ACE will improve the validity of the results.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tuncer Göktuna, P., & Yeşilbağ, K. (2017). Evaluation of diagnostic methods for the detection of pestiviruses in clinical samples. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, 41(2), 175–179. https://doi.org/10.3906/vet-1602-8

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free