Literature DB >> 17940598

Application of modified shell vial culture procedure for arbovirus detection.

Edna R Caceda1, Tadeusz J Kochel.   

Abstract

The isolation of arboviruses from patient's low titer sera can be difficult. Here we compared the detection efficiency of Dengue (DEN), Yellow Fever (YF), Saint Louis Encephalitis (SLE), West Nile (WN), Ilheus (ILH), Group C (GC), Oropouche (ORO), Mayaro (MAY) and Venezuela Encephalitis Equine (VEE) viruses using a Modified Shell Vial Culture (MSVC) protocol to a Standard Cell Culture (SCC) protocol. First the MSVC and SCC protocols were compared using five dilutions for each of the following stock viruses: DEN-1, DEN-2, DEN-3, DEN-4, YF, SLE, WN, ILH, GC, ORO, MAY and VEE. Next, patients' original sera from which viruses (DEN-1, DEN-2, DEN-3, YF, GC, ORO, MAY and VEE) had been previously isolated were compare by the two methods using five sera dilutions. In addition, seven sera that were positive for DEN-3 by RT-PCR and negative by SCC were processed by MSVC. The MSVC protocol was consistently 1-2 logs higher virus dilution more sensitive for virus detection than the SCC protocol for all stock Flaviviruses tested (DEN-1, DEN-2, DEN-3, DEN-4, YF, SLE, WN and ILH). MSVC was equal to or one log more sensitive for virus detection than SCC for the stock Bunyaviruses (GC and ORO). For the stock Alphavirus MAY, MSVC was equally or one log more sensitive for virus detection than SCC, while for VEE SCC was equally or one log more sensitive for virus detection than MSVC. MSVC was consistently one to two sera dilutions more sensitive than SCC for the detection of Flaviviruses from patients' sera. Both methods were approximately equally sensitive for the detection of Bunyaviruses from patients' sera and equal or one dilution less sensitive for the detection of Alphaviruses from patients' sera. Additionally, MSVC detected DEN virus in five of seven DEN-3 RT-PCR positive, SCC negative patients' sera.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17940598      PMCID: PMC2013940          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


Introduction

The isolation of arboviruses from patient's low titer sera can be difficult. Shell vial culture centrifugation methods for virus isolation have been shown to be more sensitive than standard isolation methods for members of the Paramyxoviradae [1]–[4], Herpesviridae [5], [6], Orthomyxoviridae [7] and Flaviviridae [8] families. DEN-2, Japanese Encephalitis (JE) and WN are the Flaviviridae viruses for which the Shell Vial method has been tested [9]. The original Shell Vial method has been adapted to 24 well tissue culture plates with centrifugation (Modified Shell Vial Culture (MSVC))[8]. We have compared the MSVC and standard cell culture (SCC) methods of virus detection for the Flaviviruses: DEN-1, DEN-2, DEN-3, DEN-4, YF, SLE, ILH and WN; the Bunyaviruses: GC, ORO and the Alphaviruses: MAY and VEE. The comparison was made using two cell lines, C636 and Vero, two incubation times, four and 10 days, with stock viruses and original patients' sera from which viruses had previously been isolated.

Methods

Stock viruses

DEN-1, DEN-2, DEN-3, DEN-4, YF, SLE, WN, ILH, GC, ORO, MAY and VEE viruses were propagated in Vero cells with Earle's Modified Essential Medium with 100 units/ml Penicillin, 100 ug/ml Streptomycin, 1 mM Sodium Pyruvate and 2% (V/V) Fetal Bovine Serum at 37°C. Upon observation of cytopathic effects, medias were collected, clarified by centrifugation at 40,000 g for five minutes and stored at −80°C until use. The Flaviviruses and Bunyaviruses were titered in BHK-21 cells; the Alphaviruses were titered in Vero cells.

Original sera

Sera were collected from febrile subjects and processed for virus isolation following the SCC method (1∶5 inoculum, 10 day incubation, C636 and/or Vero culture) and stored at −80°C until use.

The SCC method

100 ul of each stock virus dilution (undiluted, 100, 10, 1 and 0.1 PFU) or serum dilution (1∶5, 1∶10, 1∶50, 1∶100 and 1∶500) were inoculated in C636 and Vero cells propagated in T-25 cm2 flasks. The cells were incubated at 28°C and 37°C for C636 and Vero cells, respectively, for 4 and 10 days. The cells were scraped off the flasks, transferred to 5 ml test tubes and collected by centrifugation at 450 g for 10 minutes. The cell pellets were reconstituted with PBS and spotted onto slides and tested by indirect immunofluorescent assay (IFA) using DEN, YF, SLE, WN, ILH, GC, ORO, MAY and VEE polyclonal antibodies.

The MSVC method

100 ul of each stock virus dilution (undiluted, 100, 10, 1 and 0.1 PFU) or serum dilution (1∶5, 1∶10, 1∶50, 1∶100 and 1∶500) were inoculated in C636 and Vero cells propagated in 24 wells plates. The plates were centrifuged at 680 g for 30 minutes and incubated at 33°C and 37°C for C636 and Vero cells, respectively, for 4 and 10 days. The cells were scraped off the plates, transferred to 5 ml test tubes and collected by centrifugation at 450 g for 10 minutes. The cell pellets were reconstituted with PBS and spotted onto slides and tested by IFA using DEN, YF, SLE, WN, ILH, GC, ORO, MAY and VEE polyclonal antibodies.

Results and Discussion

For all stock Flaviviruses tested by the two methods, the MSVC method consistently required one to two logs less virus for virus detection in C636 cells than the SCC method (Table 1). The required amount of virus for detection by MSVC in Vero cells ranged from two logs less, to equal to that, required by the SCC method. For the Bunyaviruses, in both cell lines, the MSVC method required equal, or one log less, virus than SCC for virus detection. The results are mixed for the Alphaviruses. In both cell lines, MAY like the Bunyaviruses, the MSVC method required equal, or one log less, virus than SCC for virus detection. With VEE, MSVC required equal, or one log more, virus for virus detection than the SCC method (Table 1).
Table 1

Comparison of stock virus detection by SCC and MSVC.

VIRUSGeneraC636 Cells Lowest concentration virus detected (PFU)Vero Cells Lowest concentration virus detected (PFU)
Day 4 SCCDay 4 MSVCDay 10 SCCDay 10 MSVCDay 4 SCCDay 4 MSVCDay 10 SCCDay 10 MSVC
DEN 1 (16007)Flavivirus1001100.11010.10.1
DEN 2 (16681)Flavivirus4.7x104 101000.14.7×104 1004.7×104 0.1
DEN 3 (IQD 1728)Flavivirus1000.1100.13.0×103 1001001
DEN 4 (1036)Flavivirus100.1100.11001010.1
YF (17D)Flavivirus3.2×105 1100.110110.1
SLE (CDC)Flavivirus10.110.10.10.10.10.1
WNV (CDC)Flavivirus100.10.10.10.10.10.10.1
ILHEUS (ATCC)Flavivirus100.11000.110.10.10.1
ILHEUS (FSE 0800)Flavivirus1000.1100.10.110.10.1
GROUP C (IQU 1719)Bunyavirus10.10.10.10.10.10.10.1
OROPOUCHE 172Bunyavirus101100.110111
MAYARO (TRVL15537)Alphavirus1011011011010
VEE (TC 83)Alphavirus0.110.10.10.10.10.11
The two methods were compared for virus detection from sera from which virus had been isolated following the SCC method. For the Flavivirus sera (table 2, sera 1–18) MSVC consistently required one to two dilutions less sera for virus detection than SCC. Additionally, the MSVC method identified virus in four sera that were negative for virus detection by SCC after four days of incubation (table 2: Vero cells serum 7; C636 cells sera 13,15 and 17). Virus could not be re-isolated from three sera (table 2, sera 10–12) by SCC while virus was detected after only four days of incubation by MSVC. For the Bunyaviruses, in both cell lines, the MSVC method required equal, or one dilution less, serum for virus detection than SCC (table 2, sera 19–27). For the Alphavirus sera, MSVC required more serum for virus detected after four days of incubation for three of seven specimens in C636 culture (table 2, sera 28, 30 and 31) than SCC. However, after ten days of incubation the two methods required equal amounts of sera for virus detection for six of the seven sera. One serum (# 34) was negative for virus detection by MSVC but positive by SCC, in both cell lines.
Table 2

Comparison of virus detection in sera by SCC and MSVC.

Serum #SCC (C6/36 1∶5 Isolate)RT-PCRC636 Cells Highest dilution virus detectedVero Cells Highest dilution virus detected
Day 4 SCCDay 4 MSVCDay 10 SCCDay 10 MSVCDay 4 SCCDay 4 MSVCDay 10 SCCDay 10 MSVC
1D11∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶1001∶5001∶5001∶500
2D11∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶501∶1001∶5001∶500
3D11∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶1001∶5001∶5001∶500
4D21∶501∶1001∶1001∶500NEG1∶101∶51∶10
5D21∶1001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶51∶101∶101∶10
6D31∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶500
7D31∶1001∶5001∶1001∶500NEG1∶5001∶5001∶500
8D31∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶500
9D31∶51∶5001∶51∶500NEGNEGNEGNEG
10D3NEG1∶100NEG1∶500NEGNEGNEGNEG
11D3NEG1∶100NEG1∶500NEGNEGNEGNEG
12D3NEG1∶5NEG1∶500NEGNEGNEGNEG
13D3NEG1∶5001∶51∶500NEGNEGNEGNEG
14D31∶501∶5001∶501∶500NEGNEGNEG1∶10
15D3NEG1∶5001∶101∶500NEGNEGNEGNEG
16D31∶1001∶5001∶5001∶500NEGNEG1∶5001∶500
17D3NEG1∶101∶501∶500NEGNEGNEGNEG
18YF1∶1001∶5001∶1001∶5001∶501∶5001∶1001∶500
19GC1∶501∶5001∶1001∶5001∶51∶101∶51∶10
20GC1∶1001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶101∶501∶1001∶100
21GC1∶501∶5001∶1001∶5001∶501∶5001∶501∶500
22ORO1∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶500
23ORO1∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶500
24ORO1∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶500
25ORO1∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶500
26ORO1∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶500
27ORO1∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶500
28MAY1∶5001∶1001∶5001∶5001∶51∶51∶101∶50
29MAY1∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶101∶101∶101∶50
30MAY1∶5001∶1001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶1001∶5001∶500
31VEE1∶5001∶1001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶500
32VEE1∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶500
33VEE1∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶5001∶500
34VEE1∶50NEG1∶5NEG1∶50NEG1∶10NEG
35NEGD3NEGNEG1∶51∶50NEGNEGNEGNEG
36NEGD3NEGNEGNEGNEGNEGNEGNEGNEG
37NEGD3NEGNEGNEGNEGNEGNEGNEGNEG
38NEGD3NEG1∶10NEG1∶50NEGNEGNEGNEG
39NEGD3NEG1∶10NEG1∶50NEGNEGNEG1∶500
40NEGD3NEG1∶50NEG1∶5NEG1∶501∶101∶500
41NEGD31∶101∶5001∶1001∶500NEGNEGNEG1∶500
To further compare the two methods, seven SCC negative, DEN-3 RT-PCR positive sera were assayed by MSVC. MSVC identified virus in five of seven sera after 10 days of incubation in C636 culture while SCC detected virus in three of the sera (table 2, sera 35–41). The SCC method maybe less reproducible for virus detection than MSVC. DEN virus could not be detected in three sera (table 2, sera 10, 11 and 12) from which the viruses were originally isolated by SCC and three SCC negative, DEN-3 RT-PCR positive sera were SCC positive for DEN virus (table 2, sera 35, 40 and 41). Possibly those sera have low DEN virus titers that are at or near the limit of virus detection by SCC. However, all six specimens were positive for DEN virus by MSVC. MSVC is a rapid and efficient method for the isolation of Flaviviruses (DEN-1, DEN-2, DEN-3, DEN-4, YF, SLE, WN and ILH), Bunyaviruses (ORO and GC) and the Alphavirus MAY. The SCC method could be more suitable for the isolation of the Alphavirus VEE. For studies that involve the isolation of arboviruses the utilization of both C636 MSVC and Vero SCC may maximize virus isolation.
  9 in total

1.  Comparison of rapid centrifugation assay with conventional tissue culture method for isolation of dengue 2 virus in C6/36-HT cells.

Authors:  R Rodríguez Roche; M Alvarez; M G Guzmán; L Morier; G Kourí
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Enhanced detection of respiratory viruses using the shell vial technique and monoclonal antibodies.

Authors:  S H Lee; J E Boutilier; M A MacDonald; K R Forward
Journal:  J Virol Methods       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 2.014

3.  Evaluation of the ELVIS plate method for the detection and typing of herpes simplex virus in clinical specimens.

Authors:  Gwen A Crist; Janine M Langer; Gail L Woods; Melinda Procter; David R Hillyard
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 2.803

4.  Laboratory diagnosis of respiratory virus infections in 24 hours by utilizing shell vial cultures.

Authors:  H D Engler; J Preuss
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Evaluation of direct immunofluorescence, enzyme immunoassay, centrifugation culture, and conventional culture for the detection of respiratory syncytial virus.

Authors:  S L Johnston; C S Siegel
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Direct quantitative comparison of shell vial and conventional culture for detection of CMV viremia.

Authors:  R S Buller; M Gaudreault-Keener; J Rossiter-Fornoff; G A Storch
Journal:  Clin Diagn Virol       Date:  1995-05

7.  Identification of influenza A virus by shell vial culture and two commercially available antigen detection methods.

Authors:  L L Steed; V C Salmon; J C Overall
Journal:  Clin Diagn Virol       Date:  1994-06

8.  A rapid culture assay for examining measles virus infections from urine specimens.

Authors:  T Whistler; N Blackburn
Journal:  Clin Diagn Virol       Date:  1997-02

9.  Shell Vial Culture assay for the rapid diagnosis of Japanese encephalitis, West Nile and Dengue-2 viral encephalitis.

Authors:  Rangaiah S Jayakeerthi; Raghava V Potula; S Srinivasan; S Badrinath
Journal:  Virol J       Date:  2006-01-06       Impact factor: 4.099

  9 in total
  7 in total

1.  Comparison of a modified shell vial culture procedure with conventional mouse inoculation for rabies virus isolation.

Authors:  María de los Angeles Ribas Antúnez; Blanca Girón; Iraima Monsalvez; Luis Morier; Gretel Acosta; Yahisel Tejero; Yanislet Cordero; Dainelyd Piedra
Journal:  Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.743

2.  Ensuring Viral Safety of Equine Immunoglobulins during Production.

Authors:  V V Mashin; A N Sergeev; N N Martynova; M D Oganov; A A Sergeev; V V Kataeva; N V Zagidullin
Journal:  Pharm Chem J       Date:  2022-05-07       Impact factor: 1.063

3.  Arboviral etiologies of acute febrile illnesses in Western South America, 2000-2007.

Authors:  Brett M Forshey; Carolina Guevara; V Alberto Laguna-Torres; Manuel Cespedes; Jorge Vargas; Alberto Gianella; Efrain Vallejo; César Madrid; Nicolas Aguayo; Eduardo Gotuzzo; Victor Suarez; Ana Maria Morales; Luis Beingolea; Nora Reyes; Juan Perez; Monica Negrete; Claudio Rocha; Amy C Morrison; Kevin L Russell; Patrick J Blair; James G Olson; Tadeusz J Kochel
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2010-08-10

4.  Adenovirus respiratory tract infections in Peru.

Authors:  Julia S Ampuero; Víctor Ocaña; Jorge Gómez; María E Gamero; Josefina Garcia; Eric S Halsey; V Alberto Laguna-Torres
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-10-08       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Diagnosis of west nile virus human infections: overview and proposal of diagnostic protocols considering the results of external quality assessment studies.

Authors:  Vittorio Sambri; Maria R Capobianchi; Francesca Cavrini; Rémi Charrel; Olivier Donoso-Mantke; Camille Escadafal; Leticia Franco; Paolo Gaibani; Ernest A Gould; Matthias Niedrig; Anna Papa; Anna Pierro; Giada Rossini; Andrea Sanchini; Antonio Tenorio; Stefania Varani; Ana Vázquez; Caterina Vocale; Herve Zeller
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2013-09-25       Impact factor: 5.048

6.  Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus in Iquitos, Peru: urban transmission of a sylvatic strain.

Authors:  Amy C Morrison; Brett M Forshey; Desiree Notyce; Helvio Astete; Victor Lopez; Claudio Rocha; Rebecca Carrion; Cristhiam Carey; Dominique Eza; Joel M Montgomery; Tadeusz J Kochel
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2008-12-16

7.  Human parainfluenza virus in patients with influenza-like illness from Central and South America during 2006-2010.

Authors:  Manuel V Villaran; Josefina García; Jorge Gomez; Ana E Arango; Marina Gonzales; Wilson Chicaiza; Washington Alemán; Ivette Lorenzana de Rivera; Felix Sanchez; Nicolas Aguayo; Tadeusz J Kochel; Eric S Halsey
Journal:  Influenza Other Respir Viruses       Date:  2013-11-28       Impact factor: 4.380

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.