Evaluation of seven immunoassays for detection of rotavirus in pediatric stool samples

The performance of seven commercially manufactured rotavirus assays was evaluated with 144 pediatric stool specimens and compared with electron microscopy (EM) findings. The four enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays used were Rotazyme II, Pathfinder, IDL rotavirus immunoassay, and Enzygnost (Behring) rotavirus assay. The three latex tests were Meritec rotavirus detection test, Virogen Rotatest, and Bartels rotavirus latex test. Test outcomes were compared with EM on the basis of sensitivity, specificity, positive-negative predictive value, and the kappa statistic. Relative to EM, Meritec had the highest specificity (97%), followed by Virogen (95%), IDL (91%), Pathfinder (85%), Behring (81%), Bartels (72%), and Rotazyme (71%). The sensitivities were as follows: Rotazyme (92%), Pathfinder (89%), Bartels (86%), Virogen (86%), Behring (82%), Meritec (71%), and IDL (75%). Patient age and sex did not influence test results. Owing to the absence of a true standard, the tests were also compared with each other on the basis of the kappa statistic, the frequency of positive test results, and the frequency of samples in which a test differed from all other tests. Using these measures, the assays could be classified into three groups with progressively decreasing utility: group 1 (Virogen, Meritec, IDL, and EM), group 2 (Pathfinder and Behring), and group 3 (Rotazyme and Bartels). Laboratory criteria were also compared. Latex tests were faster and required less equipment than enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. The Virogen latex assay showed the best overall performance, which made it our choice for rapid and accurate rotavirus diagnosis. However, in children who have gastrointestinal symptoms with negative rotavirus test results, EM will be useful until such time as immunological tests for other enteric viruses are available.