In order to evaluate the optimal and essential diagnostic test(s) for a correct diagnosis of B19 diseases, 344 consecutive serum samples were tested from 344 patients with clinical suspicion of B19 infection during an epidemic period (early Spring-Autumn 2000). Sera were tested for B19 DNA by a standardized competitive polymerase chain reaction-enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (PCR-ELISA) and dot-blot hybridization and for specific IgM and IgG by ELISA. Of 344 patients examined, 125 were positive for markers of B19-associated disease: 49 had both B19 DNA and IgM, 50 had B19 DNA without IgM, and 26 had IgM without B19 DNA. After examination of the different patterns of B19 markers as diagnostic tools for B19 infection, IgM determination detected only 60% of B19-documented infections. IgM tests were nevertheless fundamental, as they were the unique diagnostic marker in 20.8% of documented infections (26 of 125 patients), in the diagnosis of recent, but still symptomatic infections when B19 DNA was no longer detectable. The determination of B19 DNA with PCR permitted detection of 79.2% of infections and therefore represented an essential test. PCR was fundamental for the diagnosis of B19 disease, as the unique diagnostic marker in 32% of documented infections (50 of 125 patients), both in acute infections at the onset of symptoms before the appearance of immunological response, and during the course of persistent B19 infections in which IgM had cleared. The contemporaneous determination of B19 DNA by PCR and specific IgM appears to be the most appropriate diagnostic protocol for the correct laboratory diagnosis of B19 infection. © 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Relevance of B19 markers in serum samples for a diagnosis of parvovirus B19-correlated diseases

Gallinella G.
Primo
;
Gentilomi G.;Manaresi E.;Venturoli S.;Bonvicini F.;Cricca M.;Zerbini M.;Musiani M.
2003

Abstract

In order to evaluate the optimal and essential diagnostic test(s) for a correct diagnosis of B19 diseases, 344 consecutive serum samples were tested from 344 patients with clinical suspicion of B19 infection during an epidemic period (early Spring-Autumn 2000). Sera were tested for B19 DNA by a standardized competitive polymerase chain reaction-enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (PCR-ELISA) and dot-blot hybridization and for specific IgM and IgG by ELISA. Of 344 patients examined, 125 were positive for markers of B19-associated disease: 49 had both B19 DNA and IgM, 50 had B19 DNA without IgM, and 26 had IgM without B19 DNA. After examination of the different patterns of B19 markers as diagnostic tools for B19 infection, IgM determination detected only 60% of B19-documented infections. IgM tests were nevertheless fundamental, as they were the unique diagnostic marker in 20.8% of documented infections (26 of 125 patients), in the diagnosis of recent, but still symptomatic infections when B19 DNA was no longer detectable. The determination of B19 DNA with PCR permitted detection of 79.2% of infections and therefore represented an essential test. PCR was fundamental for the diagnosis of B19 disease, as the unique diagnostic marker in 32% of documented infections (50 of 125 patients), both in acute infections at the onset of symptoms before the appearance of immunological response, and during the course of persistent B19 infections in which IgM had cleared. The contemporaneous determination of B19 DNA by PCR and specific IgM appears to be the most appropriate diagnostic protocol for the correct laboratory diagnosis of B19 infection. © 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
2003
Gallinella G.; Zuffi E.; Gentilomi G.; Manaresi E.; Venturoli S.; Bonvicini F.; Cricca M.; Zerbini M.; Musiani M.
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/901671
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 42
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact