This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Leland, D. S. Articles by Ginocchio, C. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Leland, D. S. Articles by Ginocchio, C. C.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Clinical Microbiology Reviews, January 2007, p. 49-78, Vol. 20, No. 1
0893-8512/07/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/CMR.00002-06
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Role of Cell Culture for Virus Detection in the Age of Technology

Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana,¹ North Shore LIJ Health System Labs, Lake Success, New York,² North Shore University Hospital, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Manhasset, New York³

Viral disease diagnosis has traditionally relied on the isolation of viral pathogens in cell cultures. Although this approach is often slow and requires considerable technical expertise, it has been regarded for decades as the "gold standard" for the laboratory diagnosis of viral disease. With the development of nonculture methods for the rapid detection of viral antigens and/or nucleic acids, the usefulness of viral culture has been questioned. This review describes advances in cell culture-based viral diagnostic products and techniques, including the use of newer cell culture formats, cryopreserved cell cultures, centrifugation-enhanced inoculation, precytopathogenic effect detection, cocultivated cell cultures, and transgenic cell lines. All of these contribute to more efficient and less technically demanding viral detection in cell culture. Although most laboratories combine various culture and nonculture approaches to optimize viral disease diagnosis, virus isolation in cell culture remains a useful approach, especially when a viable isolate is needed, if viable and nonviable virus must be differentiated, when infection is not characteristic of any single virus (i.e., when testing for only one virus is not sufficient), and when available culture-based methods can provide a result in a more timely fashion than molecular methods.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Vinh, D. C., Newby, D., Charest, H., McDonald, J. (2008). Evaluation of a Commercial Direct Fluorescent-Antibody Assay for Human Metapneumovirus in Respiratory Specimens. J. Clin. Microbiol. 46: 1840-1841 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Barenfanger, J., Mueller, T., O'Brien, J., Drake, C., Lawhorn, J. (2008). Prevalence of Human Metapneumovirus in Central Illinois in Patients Thought To Have Respiratory Viral Infection. J. Clin. Microbiol. 46: 1489-1490 [Abstract] [Full Text]