[Indirect immunofluorescence technique versus polymerase chain reaction for the diagnosis of respiratory viruses in children admitted to a hospital in the Metropolitan Region].

Corvalán L, Pablo; Arias B, Guisselle; Morales S, Paola; González M, Raquel; Inostroza S, Jaime; Fuenzalida I, Loreto

BACKGROUND Early viral detection in acute respiratory infections (ARI) is essential to establish appropriate therapy and prevent nosocomial transmission. OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy of indirect immunofluorescence technique (IIF) with the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to identify respiratory viruses in children hospitalized for ARI. METHODS 47 nasopharyngeal aspirates of children ≤ 2 years with ARI were included. IFI included respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), adenovirus, influenza A and B and parainfluenza. PCR also included the detection of metapneumovirus, enterovirus/rhinovirus, bocavirus and coronavirus. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (VPP/NPV) and kappa correlation for RSV were estimated by IIF compared to PCR. RESULTS The IIF detected only RSV (29; 61.7%). PCR detected several viruses, including RSV in 26 cases (55.3%), followed by bocavirus (29.8%), rhinovirus/enterovirus (21.3%), adenovirus (14.9%) and parainfluenza (4,3%) among others, with 35.5% of coinfection. The IIF presented sensitivity: 85.7%, specificity: 73.6%, PPV: 82.7%, NPV: 77.7% and kappa: 0.5990 (95% CI, 0.3636-0.8346) for RSV. CONCLUSION The IIF presents good sensitivity, but moderate specificity for RSV. However, IIF fails to detect other respiratory viruses. The introduction of PCR would improve the etiological diagnosis of ARI of viral origin.