Why the study?
Does a 2-step semi-nested enterovirus PCR improve the detection of enteroviral infections in patients with aseptic meningitis compared to conventional virology?
Does a 2-step semi-nested enterovirus PCR improve the detection of enteroviral infections in patients with aseptic meningitis compared to conventional virology?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PCR of both CSF and acute-phase serum is a reliable and sensitive diagnostic tool for detecting enteroviral meningitis, outperforming viral culture.
A 2-step 'semi-nested' enterovirus PCR was developed and applied to CSF and serum specimens from 27 consecutive patients with aseptic meningitis. CSF and sera from 8 patients with non-enteroviral diagnoses were included as negative clinical controls. Enterovirus RNA was detected in CSF by PCR in 15 of the patients with aseptic meningitis, compared with 6 by virus culture. Acute-phase sera proved positive for enterovirus RNA in 11 patients, thus increasing the number of PCR-positive patients to 18. Convalescent-phase sera were all negative by PCR. The correlation of a positive or negative PCR result in CSF and/or serum versus combined conventional virology (serology and isolation from 1-3 sites, i.e. CSF, stool and throat) was 78%. All negative controls were negative by PCR. PCR is a reliable and sensitive diagnostic tool for the detection of enteroviral infections. Both CSF and acute-phase serum should be considered for testing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thorén et al. (1994) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: