Comparison of six commercial kits for the diagnosis of rotavirus infection in man and calves

Abstract

Seventy-two human and 72 bovine faecal specimens were tested for rotavirus by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE), four commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kits (Rotascreen, Wellcozyme, Rotazyme II and IDEIA) and two latex agglutination (LA) kits (RotaScreen and Wellcome). Specimens which were negative by PAGE but positive by one or more of the kits were further examined by direct and immuno-electron microscopy (DEM and IEM). If also negative by DEM and IEM the kit result was considered to be a false positive. Three kits (RotaScreen and IDEIA ELISAs and RotaScreen LA) had specificity and sensitivity greater than 90% on the human specimens but only two (RotaScreen ELISA and LA) had specificity and sensitivity over 80% on the bovine specimens. These kits can therefore be used with reasonable confidence for rotavirus diagnosis, but none of them has any advantage over PAGE other tha speed.