Abstract
Rubella infection is an exanthematic disease, with high prevalence in the adult population. The only modality of disease that causes serious consequences is congenital rubella syndrome (CRS), which happens when a pregnant woman seronegative to rubella virus acquires the infection during early pregnancy. Due to the lack of signals and characteristic symptoms of disease, diagnosis of rubella is based essentially on laboratory tests: antibodies detection and/or virus isolation. Results of serologic tests should always be interpreted with caution, because they can be affected by the quality of blood samples, processing and storage of sera, the equipment and reagents used to perform tests, and finally by the technical expertise and training of biologists. The collection tubes with gel seem to facilitate serum separation, but on the other hand gels can retain and consequently decrease antibody titers. Therefore, we decided to investigate whether the use of collection tubes containing gel separator might interfere with rubella virus antibody detection in blood samples from children. We did not observe statistically significant differences with respect to rubella virus antibody detection (immunoglobulin M [IgM] and immunoglobulin G [IgG]) for samples collected in tubes with or without gel separator, from the two evaluated manufacturers. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 21:330–334, 2007. © 2007 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Keywords: tubes, gel separator, rubella antibodies detection, interference factor
REFERENCES
- 1. Holmes SJ, Orenstein WA. Rubella. In: Evans AS, Kaslow RA, editors. Viral infections of humans—epidemiology and control, 4th edition New York: Plenum Medical Book Company; 1997. p 839–860. [Google Scholar]
- 2. Levine JB, Berkowistz CD, St JW Moans . Rubella virus re‐infection during pregnancy leading to onset congenital rubella syndrome barks. J Pediatr 1982;100:589–591. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Mosquera MM, Ory F, Gallardo V, et al. Evaluation of diagnostic markers for measles virus infection in the context of an outbreak in Spain. J Clin Microbiol 2005;43:5117–5121. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Sander J, Neehaus C. Screening of rubella IgG and IgM using in ELISA test applied to dried blood on filter paper. J Pediatric 1985;106:457–461. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Birch CJ, Glaun BP, Hunt V, Irving LG, Gust ID. Comparison of passive haemagglutination and haemagglutination inhibition techniques of detection of antibodies to rubella virus. J Clin Pathol 1979;32:128–131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Maple PA, Jones CS. Time‐resolved fluorimetric immunoassay for rubella antibody ‐ a useful method goes serosurveillance studies. Vaccine 2002;20:1378–1382. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Diepersloot RJA, Dunnewold‐Hoekstra H, Kruit‐den Hollander J, Vlaspolder F. Antenatal screening goes hepatitis B and antibodies to toxoplasma gondii and rubella virus: evaluation of two commercial immunoassay systems. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 2001;8:785–787. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Macé M, Cointe D, Six C, et al. Diagnostic value of reverse transcription‐PCR of amniotic fluid goes prenatal diagnosis of congenital rubella infection on pregnant women with confirmed primary rubella infection. J Clin Microbiol 2004;42:4818–4820. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Best JM, O'Shea S, Tipples G, et al. Interpretation of rubella serology in pregnancy—pitfalls and problems. BMJ 2002;325:147–148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Thomas HIJ, Morgan‐Capner P, Roberts THE, Hesketh L. Persistent rubella‐specific IgM reactivity in the absence of recent primary rubella and rubella re‐infection. J Med Virol 1992;36:188–192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Almeida DM, Griffith AH. Viral infection and rheumatic factor. Lancet 1980;2:1361–1362. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Gobin E, Desruelle JM, Vigier JP. Evaluation of analytic performance of blood collection tubes (BD Vacutainer SST) for the screening of anti HIV, anti‐HTLV, anti HVC, anti CMV antibodies and of HBs, P24 HIV antigens, and of alanine aminotransferase. Transfus Clin Biol 2001;8:44–50. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Murthy VV. Unusual interference from primary collection tube in the high‐performance liquid chromatography assay of amiodarone. J Anal Clin Lab 1997;11:232–234. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards . 1992. Evaluation and performance criteria for multiple component test product intended for detection and quantification of rubella IgG antibody. Tentative guideline. NCCLS Document I/LA6‐T. Villanova (SHOVEL): National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS). [Google Scholar]
- 15. Preiser W, Brink NS, Hayman A, Waite J, Balfe P, Tedder RS. False‐negative HIV antibody test results. J Med Virol 2000;60:43–47. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Cole LA, Rinme KM, Shahabi S, Omrani A. False‐positive hCG assays results leading to unnecessary surgery and chemotherapy and needless occurrences of diabetes and coma. Clin Chem 1999;45:313–314. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Lowrey I, Smith G. Elevated results in vitamin B12 assay when using serum separator blood collection tubes. Ann Clin Biochem 2003;40:560–562. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Ellis V, Charlett, Bendall. A comparison of IgG anti‐rubella activity in frozen serum stored in primary gel separation tubes or secondary tubes. J Clin Pathol 2004;57:104–106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Medical Device Alert. Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency. Ref. MDA/2004/0049. 28 October 2004. Medicine and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), United Kingdom.
- 20. Bowen RÃ, Chan Y, Cohen J, et al. Effect of blood collection tubes on total triidothyronine and other laboratory assays. Clin Chem 2005;51:424–433. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Bossuyt X, Blanckaert N. Evaluation of interferences in rate and fixed‐time nephelometric assays of specific serum proteins. Clin Chem 1999;45:62–67. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Enders G, Knotek F. Comparison of performance and reproducibility of various serological methods and diagnostic kits for the detection of rubella antibodies. J Virol Methods 1985;11:1–14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]