Users Online: 744
Home Print this page Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Browse articles Submit article Ahead of Print Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
BRIEF REPORT
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 95

Comparison of serological and molecular test for diagnosis of infectious mononucleosis


1 Department of Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2 Student Research Center, Faculty of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
3 Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
4 Student Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Marziyeh Salehi
Department of Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2277-9175.183144

Rights and Permissions

Background: Epstein-Bar virus (EBV) is the main etiology of infectious mononucleosis (IM) syndrome that is characterized by fever, sore throat, and lymph adenopathy. Since, this virus could be associated with a number of malignancies, some hematologic disorders, and chronic fatigue syndrome, identification of IM is very important. The aim of study was to evaluate the specificity, as well as sensitivity of the two different methods that is, serology versus molecular diagnosis that are currently used for diagnosis of IM. Materials and Methods: In this study, during a period of 3.5 years, 100 suspected patients as case group and 100 healthy individuals as a control group were studied. Fifty samples in each group were tested by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and all the samples including case group and control group were carried out by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Results: In 76% of patients and in 20% of the healthy individuals, samples were detected EBV DNA by PCR. On the other hand, 68.5% of the samples belong to the case group and 46% in the control group showed positivity by ELISA. Conclusion: By comparing the two methods, since PCR is very expensive and time consuming, and the percentages of difference ranges are narrow, ELISA could be applied as a first, easiest, and preliminary diagnostic test for IM. In addition, this test could be applied in various phases of the disease with a higher sensitivity comparing to PCR. Although PCR is routinely used for diagnosis of various infectious agents, it is considered as an expensive test and merely could be used after 1-2 weeks from the onset of the illness.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1691    
    Printed33    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded282    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal