Prospective comparison of R-mix™ shell vial system with direct antigen tests and conventional cell culture for respiratory virus detection

Background and objectivesConventional cell culture (CC) has limited clinical utility as a result of the extended incubation period often required for virus isolation. Alternative methodologies have been introduced in an effort to improve turnaround times. One such system, the R-mix™ shell vial is discussed herein. The study objectives were: (a) to establish R-mix™ testing parameters as compared to direct antigen testing (DAT) and CC, and (b) to assess technical aspects and cost of R-mix™ in a high volume clinical virology laboratory.Study designA prospective analysis of respiratory samples submitted to the clinical virology laboratory between November 2004 and April 2005 was performed. All specimens were inoculated onto R-mix™ shell vials (SV) and CC tubes; and a subset also underwent DAT for influenza A and B and/or RSV. A retrospective estimated cost analysis was made.ResultsA total of 563 samples were included in the study, which collectively revealed a total of 207 viruses. Sensitivity of R-mix™ for seven major respiratory viruses ranged from 45% to 83% compared to CC and DAT, while mean time to detection (TTD) varied from 1.1 to 1.4 days. In addition to these viruses, 23 picornaviruses, 11 CMV isolates and 5 HSV isolates were detected by CC alone.ConclusionsThe R-mix™ system has similar sensitivity as CC for the detection of parainfluenza 1–3 and influenza A/B while dramatically reducing the TTD. Furthermore, it is significantly more sensitive and produces more timely results for RSV than CC; yet, neither method offers a diagnostic benefit over rapid DAT for RSV detection. The sensitivity of R-mix™ for adenovirus appears to be significantly lower than that of CC. Lastly, methodologies other than R-mix™ must remain in place under circumstances where identification of other potential viral respiratory pathogens, including herpesviruses and picornaviruses, is desired.