Minireviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Virology. Aug 12, 2015; 4(3): 295-302
Published online Aug 12, 2015. doi: 10.5501/wjv.v4.i3.295
Table 1 Diagnostic assays for foot-and-mouth disease virus diagnosis with their associated advantages and disadvantage
FMD diagnostic assaySpecimen materialsTarget regionSensitivitySpecificityAdvantagesDisadvantages
Sandwich ELISARNA from TE, FL, TE,VP1 protein80%100%Easy to perform Suitable for handling large number of samplesLess sensitive, not suitable for certain type of clinical samples
Multiplex PCRRNA from TE, FL, TE, Semen, Milk1D regionMinimum detection limit of 1 × 10-1 TCID50/mL100% specific for cross serotype detectionRapid and sensitive Suitable for samples like semen and milkHigh risk of generating false positives
Taqman real-time PCRRNA from TE, FL, TE, Semen, Milk1D regionMinimum detection limit of 101.0 TCID50/mL100% specific for cross serotype detectionMore sensitive and specific than gel based assayhigh risk of generating false positives
Virus isolation and neutralizationTriturated material of TE, FL, TE,--Gold standard assay for FMD diagnosisSlow takes 1-4 d for confirmatory results
RNA transfectionRNA from TE, FL, TE, Semen, Milk------FMDV can be isolated from deteriorated clinical materials--
LAMPRNA from TE, FL, TE, Semen, Milk3D regionMinimum detection limit up to 1.1 × 10-4 TCID50/mL--Require no specialized instruments, can be used as point-of-care diagnosisHigh risk of generating false positives
3AB3 I-ELISASerum3AB3 region96%99.1% -96.4%Sensitive and SpecificOnly for bovine species
3ABC C-ELISASerum3ABC regionSpecific assayUniversal for all speciesLess sensitive than I-ELISA
2Ct I-ELISASerum2C regionSensitive and SpecificOnly for bovine species