Why the study?
Does in situ hybridization improve the detection of human rhinovirus RNA compared to RT-PCR or virus culture in patients with common colds?
Does in situ hybridization improve the detection of human rhinovirus RNA compared to RT-PCR or virus culture in patients with common colds?
In situ hybridization is a sensitive methodology for detecting human rhinovirus infection in the upper respiratory tract, useful for investigating physiopathology.
May support in situ hybridization for rhinovirus physiopathology research; does not justify changes to clinical diagnostic practices.
Human rhinovirus 14 RNA was determined by in situ hybridization from middle turbinate biopsies in 32 patients with diagnosed common colds and in five control individuals. Twenty-two (69%) biopsies from common colds patients but none of the five control biopsies showed reactivity for human rhinovirus 14 antisense probe. The signal was detected both in the respiratory epithelium and in mucosal inflammatory cells. In situ hybridization of the middle turbinate tissue yielded more positive results than RT-PCR (47%) or virus culture (34%) assayed from nasopharyngeal aspirates, but no statistical significant differences were observed (P = 0.265, P = 0.425, respectively). The results indicated that in situ hybridization procedure was slightly more sensitive than PCR assays and classical culture for the detection of human rhinovirus infection of upper respiratory tract. However, in situ hybridization procedure appeared to be an interesting methodology to investigate the physiopathology of respiratory tract infection by rhinoviruses.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pitkäranta et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: