Rapid diagnostic tests for influenza

Current Opinion in Pediatrics

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 77-84

  Storch, Gregory A ^a,b  

^a WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b ST LOUIS CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

OSELTAMIVIR; ZANAMIVIR;

ANTIVIRAL ACTIVITY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEVICE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DRUG EFFECT; HUMAN; INFLUENZA; INFLUENZA VIRUS; LABORATORY TEST; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SCREENING TEST; VIRUS DETECTION;

AGE FACTORS; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; CLINICAL LABORATORY TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; INFANT; INFLUENZA, HUMAN; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 0037307195     PISSN: 10408703     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00008480-200302000-00013     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. Bridges CB, Fukuda K, Uyeki TM, et al.: Prevention and control of influenza. Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR Recomm Rep 2002, 51:1-31. •• Comprehensive discussion of current recommendations for use of influenza vaccine. Includes excellent background discussion of many aspects of influenza.
2. Neuzil KM, Mellen BG, Wright PF, et al.: The effect of influenza on hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and courses of antibiotics in children. N Engl J Med 2000, 342:225-231.
3. Izurieta HS, Thompson WW, Kramarz P, et al.: Influenza and the rates of hospitalization for respiratory disease among infants and young children. N Engl J Med 2000, 342:232-239.
4. Hayden FG, Treanor JJ, Fritz RS, et al.: Use of the oral neuraminidase inhibitor oseltamivir in experimental human influenza: randomized controlled trials for prevention and treatment. JAMA 1999, 282:1240-1246.
5. Hayden FG, Osterhaus AD, Treanor JJ, et al.: Efficacy and safety of the neuraminidase inhibitor zanamivir in the treatment of influenzavirus infections. N Engl J Med 1997, 337:874-880.
6. Boivin G, Hardy I, Tellier G, et al.: Predicting influenza infections during epidemics with use of a clinical case definition. Clin Infect Dis 2000, 31:1166-1169.
7. Monto AS, Gravenstein S, Elliott M, et al.: Clinical signs and symptoms predicting influenza infection. Arch Intern Med 2000, 160:3243-3247.
8. Dagan R, Hall CB: Influenza A virus infection imitating bacterial sepsis in early infancy. Pediatr Infect Dis 1984, 3:218-221.
9. van Elden LJ, Nijhuis M, Schipper P, et al.: Simultaneous detection of influenza viruses A and B using real-time quantitative PCR. J Clin Microbiol 2001, 39:196-200.
10. Steininger C, Kundi M, Aberle SW, et al.: Effectiveness of reverse transcription-PCR, virus isolation, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for diagnosis of influenza A virus infection in different age groups. J Clin Microbiol 2002, 40:2051-2056. • This paper is one of several that compares RT-PCR to the previous gold standard of viral culture. The RT-PCR assay could detect as few as 1-4 copies of influenza RNA and was more sensitive than culture. It was used to supplement culture to establish an improved gold standard, which was used to evaluate the performance of the Flu OIA test.
11. Herrmann B, Larsson C, Zweygberg BW: Simultaneous detection and typing of influenza viruses A and B by a nested reverse transcription-PCR: comparison to virus isolation and antigen detection by immunofluorescence and optical immunoassay (FLU OIA). J Clin Microbiol 2001, 39:134-138.
12. Ray CG, Minnich LL: Efficiency of immunofluorescence for rapid detection of common respiratory viruses. J Clin Microbiol 1987, 25:355-357.
13. Landry ML, Ferguson D: SimulFluor respiratory screen for rapid detection of multiple respiratory viruses in clinical specimens by immunofluorescence staining. J Clin Microbiol 2000, 38:708-711.
14. Kaiser L, Briones MS, Hayden FG: Performance of virus isolation and Directigen Flu A to detect influenza A virus in experimental human infection. J Clin Virol 1999, 14:191-197.
15. Yuen KY, Chan PK, Peiris M, et al.: Clinical features and rapid viral diagnosis of human disease associated with avian influenza A H5N1 virus. Lancet 1998, 351:467-471.
16. Rodriguez WJ, Schwartz RH, Thorne MM: Evaluation of diagnostic tests for influenza in a pediatric practice. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2002, 21:193-196. •• This is an interesting study carried out in a pediatrician's office comparing the performance of four of the seven commercial rapid influenza tests. This is the only published study to compare directly four of the tests. One of the tests, ZstatFlu, which is performed only on throat swab specimens, was less sensitive than the other tests.
17. Leonardi GP, Leib H, Birkhead GS, et al.: Comparison of rapid detection methods for influenza A virus and their value in health-care management of institutionalized geriatric patients. J Clin Microbiol 1994, 32:70-74.
18. Johnston SLG, Bloy H: Evaluation of a rapid enzyme immunoassay for detection of influenza A virus. J Clin Microbiol 1993, 31:142-143.
19. Waner JL, Todd SJ, Shalaby J, et al.: Comparison of Directigen FLU-A with viral isolation and direct immunofluorescence for the rapid detection and identification of influenza A virus. J Clin Microbiol 1991, 29:479-482.
20. Landry ML, Cohen S, Ferguson D: Impact of sample type on rapid detection of influenza virus A by cytospin-enhanced immunofluorescence and membrane enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. J Olin Microbiol 2000, 38:429-430.
21. Noyola DE, Clark B, O'Donnell FT, et al.: Comparison of a new neuraminidase detection assay with an enzyme immunoassay, immunofluorescence, and culture for rapid detection of influenza A and B viruses in nasal wash specimens. J Clin Microbiol 2000, 38:1161-1165.
22. Ryan-Poirier KA, Katz JM, Webster RG, et al: Application of Directigen FLU-A for the detection of influenza A virus in human and nonhuman specimens. J Clin Microbiol 1992, 30:1072-1075.
23. Chan KH, Maldeis N, Pope W, et al.: Evaluation of the Directigen Flu A + B test for rapid diagnosis of influenza virus type A and B infections. J Clin Microbiol 2002, 40:1675-1680. •• This study evaluated the Directigen Flu A + B test in specimens obtained largely from children. Reverse transcription-PCR was used to resolve discrepancies between the rapid test and culture. Directigen A + B performed very well for both influenza A and B.
24. Hamilton MS, Abel DM, Ballam YJ, et al.: Clinical evaluation of the ZstatFlu-II test: a chemiluminescent rapid diagnostic test for influenza virus. J Clin Microbiol 2002, 40:2331-2334. •• This study evaluated 300 nasal aspirate specimens from children with respiratory illness. The ZstatFlu test evaluated was a prototype test that is not yet commercially available, but may be faster and more sensitive than the current commercially available test. The study also evaluated the Directigen A + B test and provides useful data because most of the influenza strains in the study specimens were influenza B, which has been evaluated less extensively than influenza A.
25. Covalciuc KA, Webb KH, Carlson CA: Comparison of four clinical specimen types for detection of influenza A and B viruses by optical immunoassay (FLU OIA Test) and cell culture methods. J Clin Microbiol 1999, 37:3971-3974.
26. Hindiyeh M, Goulding C, Morgan H, et al.: Evaluation of BioStar FLU OIA assay for rapid detection of influenza A and B viruses in respiratory specimens. J Clin Virol 2000, 17:119-126.
27. Boivin G, Hardy I, Kress A: Evaluation of a rapid optical immunoassay for influenza viruses (FLU OIA test) in comparison with cell culture and reverse transcription-PCR. J Clin Microbiol 2001, 39:730-732.
28. Schultze D, Thomas Y, Wunderli W: Evaluation of an optical immunoassay for the rapid detection of influenza A and B viral antigens. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2001, 20:280-283. •• Although the culture method used in this study was somewhat different from the standard culture method used in the U.S. the study is one of the larger studies evaluating the Flu OIA test and provides data comparing its performance on specimens derived from children and adults.
29. Hulson TD, Mold JW, Scheid D, et al.: Diagnosing influenza: the value of clinical clues and laboratory tests. J Fam Pract 2001, 50:1051-1056.
30. Poehling KA, Griffin MR, Dittus RS, et al.: Bedside diagnosis of influenzavirus infections in hospitalized children. Pediatrics 2002, 110:83-88. •• This is a well-performed study that evaluates the performance of the Quidel Influenza Test on a collection on specimens collected from all patients admitted to Vanderbilt Children's Hospital during one influenza season who had respiratory symptoms or were under 3 years of age and had fever. Reverse transcription-PCR was used in addition to culture as a standard for comparison. One of the interesting aspects of the study is that the performance of the rapid test and of culture were both compared with RT-PCR, and the rapid test actually detected more RT-PCR-positive specimens than were detected by culture. Another interesting aspect is a listing of the diverse admitting diagnoses of the children found to have influenza, none of which were influenza.
31. Sharma V, Dowd MD, Slaughter AJ, et al.: Effect of rapid diagnosis of influenza virus type A on the emergency department management of febrile infants and toddlers. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2002, 156:41-43. • This study evaluates the effect of early diagnosis of influenza on clinical management. The study suggests that early diagnosis was associated with less ceftriaxone use and fewer laboratory tests. The study was retrospective in design and should be confirmed by prospective hypothesis-driven studies.
32. Noyola DE, Demmler GJ: Effect of rapid diagnosis on management of influenza A infections. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2000, 19:303-307.
33. Woo PC, Chiu SS, Seto WH, et al.: Cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnosis of viral respiratory tract infections in pediatric patients. J Clin Microbiol 1997, 35:1579-1581.
34. Barenfanger J, Drake C, Leon N, et al.: Clinical and financial benefits of rapid detection of respiratory viruses: an outcomes study. J Clin Microbiol 2000, 38:2824-2828.