<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/rdf/" xmlns:ow="http://www.ontoweb.org/ontology/1#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:ds="http://dspace.org/ds/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:doc="http://www.lyncode.com/xoai" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/rdf/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/rdf.xsd">
   <ow:Publication rdf:about="oai:digibug.ugr.es:10481/90165">
      <dc:title>Reliability of four methods for the diagnosis of acute infection by Epstein-Barr virus</dc:title>
      <dc:creator>Gutiérrez Fernández, José</dc:creator>
      <dc:creator>Rodríguez, M.</dc:creator>
      <dc:creator>Maroto Vela, María del Carmen</dc:creator>
      <dc:creator>Piédrola Angulo, Gonzalo</dc:creator>
      <dc:subject>Epstein-Barr virus</dc:subject>
      <dc:subject>Cytomegalovirus</dc:subject>
      <dc:subject>Herpes simple virus</dc:subject>
      <dc:subject>IgG</dc:subject>
      <dc:subject>IgM</dc:subject>
      <dc:description>We studied the reliability of new indirect tests in the diagnosis of acute infection by Epstein-Barr virus (EBV). Studied for all samples were method 1, the heterophil antibodies (Abs) (Monolatex, Biokit, Germany); method 2, the IgM Abs to EBV with ELISA tests (antigen pools, Enzygnost, Behring-werke, Germany); method 3, EA (Biotest Diagnostics, Germany); and method 4, the IgG avidity test. The reliability of the four tests for the detection of primary infection by EBV was: sensitivity (method 1: 89.1%; method 2: 100%; method 3: 79.7%; method 4: 99%); specificity (method 1: 98%; method 2: 100%; method 3: 84%; method 4: 100%); positive predictive value (method 1: 97.6%; method 2: 100%; method 3: 73.6%; method 4: 100%), and negative predictive value (method 1: 90.7%; method 2: 100%; method 3: 84%; method 4: 99%). The IgG avidity test (method 4) is simple and automated in the laboratory and is very useful for ascertaining, from a single sample, the time since infection. It is criteria of recent primoinfection higher levels than 55% of IgG with low avidity for the antigen. The investigation of the Abs to antigen pools (method 2) by ELISA of virus had a high reliability, but the investigation of heterophil Abs by latex (method 1) and the Abs IgM to EA (method 2) were lacking in sensibility regarding their use in the diagnosis of the primoinfection.</dc:description>
      <dc:date>2024-03-21T12:40:33Z</dc:date>
      <dc:date>2024-03-21T12:40:33Z</dc:date>
      <dc:date>1997</dc:date>
      <dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
      <dc:identifier>J. Gutiérrez, M. Rodríguez, C. Maroto and G. Piédrola. Reliability of four methods for the diagnosis of acute infection by Epstein-Barr virus. J Clin Lab Anal. 1997;11(2):78-81. PMCID: PMC6760749</dc:identifier>
      <dc:identifier>PMCID: PMC6760749</dc:identifier>
      <dc:identifier>https://hdl.handle.net/10481/90165</dc:identifier>
      <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
      <dc:rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/</dc:rights>
      <dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights>
      <dc:rights>Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional</dc:rights>
      <dc:publisher>Wiley</dc:publisher>
   </ow:Publication>
</rdf:RDF>