May 2005
Volume 46, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2005
Rapid Detection of Conjunctival Adenovirus Infection by Immunochromatography
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • K. Kozich
    Dept Ophthalmology, University Eye Hospital, Erlangen, Germany
  • B. Seitz
    Dept Ophthalmology, University Eye Hospital, Erlangen, Germany
  • C. Cursiefen
    Dept Ophthalmology, University Eye Hospital, Erlangen, Germany
  • F.E. Kruse
    Dept Ophthalmology, University Eye Hospital, Erlangen, Germany
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  K. Kozich, None; B. Seitz, None; C. Cursiefen, None; F.E. Kruse, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2005, Vol.46, 1023. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      K. Kozich, B. Seitz, C. Cursiefen, F.E. Kruse; Rapid Detection of Conjunctival Adenovirus Infection by Immunochromatography . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):1023.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Abstract: : Purpose: Conjunctival adenovirus infections are a common entity in every outpatient department. An easy and rapid to perform test for detection could help easing diagnosis of this contagious disease. The purpose of this study was to assess the specificity and sensitivity of a newly developed adenovirus detection test. Methods: As part of a prospective multi–center study a test for detection of adenovirus [RPS Adeno Test, Securetec] based on the principle of immunochromatography was performed in 39 suspicious patients. Inclusion criteria: Presence of at least 2 out of 3 categories (1. subjective symptoms, such as foreign body sensation, 2. history, such as unilateral start of binocular disease and 3. clinical signs such as follicular conjuctival reaction and swelling of lymphatic nodules). All 39 patients showed conjunctival injection, additionally 3 patients presented with nummuli, 4 with swelling of lacrimal caruncle, 4 with subjective symptoms, 2 with cervical lymphadenitis. A conjunctival swab was performed and placed into a buffer solution for 15 seconds. After 10 minutes 1 or 2 lines appeared on the swab indicating the result of the test (1 line = negative, 2 lines = positive). Results were read out independently by a physician and a nurse. For confirmation of the RPS Adeno Test, another swab was taken for PCR. Results: All tests could be read out unequivocally. Until now there were no differences between the results of the physicians and the nurses. In 2 out of 3 PCR positive samples the test was positive (sensitivity: 67%) and in 35 out of 36 PCR negative samples the test was negative (specificity: 97%). Conclusions: Our preliminary results indicate a high specificity, but only moderate sensitivity of the RPS Adenotest. In 37 out of 39 samples (94.9%) the results of the test were correct compared to PCR. The results of the easy to use RPS Adeno Test are accessible within minutes, whereas PCR and other methods take longer time, are far more expensive and require specifically trained stuff. Further technical improvements are required to increase the sensitivity of the test.

Keywords: adenovirus • clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: treatment/prevention assessment/controlled • conjunctivitis 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.