HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ghebremedhin, B. Articles by König, B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ghebremedhin, B. Articles by König, B. Agricola Articles by Ghebremedhin, B. Articles by König, B.

Comparison of the performance of the rapid antigen detection actim Influenza A&B test and RT-PCR in different respiratory specimens

¹ University Clinic Magdeburg, Institute of Medical Microbiology, Magdeburg, Germany

² Institute of Virology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany

Correspondence
B. Ghebremedhin
beniam.ghebremedhin{at}med.ovgu.de

Received June 22, 2008
Accepted November 14, 2008

Nowadays, influenza antigen detection test kits are used most frequently to detect influenza A or B virus to establish the diagnosis of influenza rapidly and initiate appropriate therapy. This study was conducted to evaluate the performance of the actim Influenza A&B test (Medix Biochemica). Overall, 473 respiratory specimens were analysed in the actim Influenza A&B test and the results were compared with those from an RT-PCR assay; 461 of these samples originated from paediatric patients aged 7 weeks to 6.5 years either with influenza-related symptoms or from the intensive care unit, and 12 samples originated from adults with underlying lung or haematological diseases. Diagnosis of influenza A or B virus could be established using the actim Influenza A&B test (9/473 samples for influenza A virus and 6/473 for influenza B virus). RT-PCR revealed 23 patients with influenza virus (13/473 for influenza A virus and 10/473 for influenza B virus). The sensitivity and specificity of the actim Influenza A&B test were 65 and 100 % compared with the RT-PCR assay. However, 32 external quality assessment samples containing seven different strains of influenza A subtypes H1N1 and H3N2 and the avian H5N1 were detected correctly by the actim Influenza A&B test. No cross-reactivity to a range of bacterial, fungal and other viral pathogens was observed. In conclusion, the actim Influenza A&B test is reliable for positive results due to its high specificity. Nevertheless, negative results from this test need to be confirmed by a more sensitive assay because of the low sensitivity observed with diagnostic samples.