Iranian Journal of Microbiology 2011. 3(2):75-79.

A comparative analysis of routine techniques: Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and five cell lines for detection of enteroviruses in stool specimens
F Abbasian, H Tabatabaie, M Sarijloo, S Shahmahmoodi, A Yousefi, T Saberbaghi, T Mokhtari Azad, R Nategh


Background and objectives: Each year, Enteroviruses infect millions of people and cause different diseases. The agents are usually detected using cell culture. RD (Rhabdomyosarcoma) and L20B (L cells) are among the recommended cells by the World Health Organisation (WHO) for this purpose. Even though cell culture is the most common method used in diagnosing Enteroviruses in stool specimens, this particular method poses some problems, which include false positive or negative results, lack of a unique cell line for diagnosing all Enterovirus types in addition to being time consuming. For these reasons, an attempt was made to find better techniques of Enterovirus detection. RT-PCR (Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction) is a technique used in place of the cell culture method. In this study, the cell culture method was compared with RT-PCR for detection of Enteroviruses in stool specimens.
Material and method: First, the chloroform treated stool samples were inoculated onto five cell lines, including RD, L20B, Hep-2 (Human Epidermoid carcinoma cell line), Vero (Verde Reno) and GMK (Green Monkey Kidney). The results were then compared with data from Enterovirus detection using the RT-PCR technique.
Results and conclusion: The difference between RT-PCR and cell culture results was significant. Enteroviruses were detected in 24% of specimens using RT-PCR while cell lines could isolate Enteroviruses in just 14.4% of the samples.


Enteroviruses; RT-PCR; Cell Cultures

Full Text:



American Public Health Association (1995). Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater,19th ed. American Public Health Association, Washing- ton, D.C. pp. 7-8.

Oberste MS, Maher K, Kilpatrick D R, Flemister MR, Brown BA, Pallansch MA. Typing of human Enterovi- ruses by partial sequencing of VP1. J Clin Microb 1999;37: 1288-1293.

Pöyry T, Kinnunen L, Hyypiä T, Brown B, Horsnell C, Hovi T et al . Genetic and phylogenetic clustering of Enteroviruses. J Gen Viro 1996; 77: 1699-1717.

Terletskaia LE, Meier S, Hahn R, Leinmuller M, Sch- neider F, Enders M. A convenient rapid culture assay for the detection of Enteroviruses in clinical samples: comparison with conventional cell culture and RT-PCR. J Med Microb 2008; 57: 1000–1006.

Gajanan N, Sapkal GN, Bondre VP, Fulmali PV, Patil P, Gopalkrishna V. Enteroviruses in patients with acute encephalitis. Uttar Pradesh, India. Emerg Infect Dis 2009; 15 : 295-298.

Fields BN, Knipe DM, Howley PM, Chanock RM, Monath TP, Melnick JL, et al. (1996). Enteroviruses: Polioviruses, Coxsackieviruses, Echoviruses, and newer Enteroviruses. In: Fields virology, Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 3rd ed., Philadelphia, Pa. vol. 2. pp. 655-712.

Leland DS and Ginocchio CC. Role of Cell Culture for Virus Detection in the Age of Technology. Clin Microb Rev 2007; 20: 49-78.

Dagan R and Menegus MA. A combination of four cell types for rapid detection of Enteroviruses in clinical specimens. J Med Virol 1986; 19: 219-228.

Chonmaitree T, Ford C, Sanders C, Lucia HL. Compari- son of cell cultures for rapid isolation of Enteroviruses. J Clin Microb 1988; 26: 2576-2580.

Archimbaud C, Chambon M, Bailly JL, Petit I, Henquell C, Mirand A, et al. Impact of rapid Enterovirus molecu- lar diagnosis on the management of infants, children, and adults with aseptic meningitis. J Med Viro 2009;81: 42-48.

Hong J, Kang B, Kim A, Hwang S, Lee S, Kim J, et al.Enhanced detection of Enteroviruses in clinical samples by RT-PCR using complementary locked primer Tech- nology. J Clin Microb 2009: 48: 615-616.

WHO (2004). Polio Laboratory Manual. WHO, Geneva.

Shoja ZO, Tabatabai H, Sarijloo M, Shahmahmoodi S, Azad TM, Nategh R. Detection of Enteroviruses by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction in cell culture negative stool specimens of patients with acute flaccid paralysis. J Virol Methods 2007; 142 (1-2): 95-7.

Chomczynski P and Sacchi N. Single-step method of RNA isolation by acid guanidinium thiocyanate–phe- nol–chloroform extraction. Anal Biochem 1987; 162:156-159.

Johnston SL and Siegel CS Presumptive identification of Enteroviruses with RD, HEp-2, and RMK cell lines. J Clin Microbiol 1990; 28: 1049-1050.

Sigel MM, Rippe DF, Beasley AR, Dorsey M (1976).Systems for detecting viruses and viral activity. In: Vi- ruses in water. American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C. pp. 139-164.

Wait D, Tai L, Sobsey MD. Methods to remove inhibi- tors in sewage and other fecal wastes for Enterovirus detection by the polymerase chain reaction. J Virologi- cal Methods 1995; 54: 51-66.

Schmidt NJ, HO HH, Riggs JL, Lennette EH.Comparative sensitivity of various cell culture systems for isolation of viruses from wastewater and fecal samples. Appl Environ Microb 1978; 36; 480-486.

Lee C, Lee S, Han E, Kim S. Use of cell culture-PCR assay based on combination of A549 and BGMK cell lines and molecular identification as a tool to monitor infectious adenoviruses and Enteroviruses in river wa- ter. Appl Environ Microbiol 2004; 70: 6695-6705.

Chapron, CD, Ballester NA, Fontaine JH, Frades CN, Margolin AB. Detection of Astroviruses, Enteroviruses and Adenovirus types 40 and 41 in surface waters col- lected and evaluated by the information collection Rule and an integrated cell culture-nested PCR procedure. Appl Environ Microbiol 2000; 66: 2520-2525.

Kessler HH, Santner B, Rabenau H, Berger A, Vince A, et al. Rapid diagnosis of Enterovirus infection by a new one-Step reverse transcription-PCR assay. J Clin Micro 1997; 35: 976-977.

Nix WA, Oberste MS, Pallansch MA. Sensitive semi- nested PCR amplification of VP1 sequences for direct identification of all Enterovirus serotypes from original clinical specimens. J Clin Microb 2006; 44: 2698-2704.

Lee C, Lee S, Han E, Kim S. Use of cell culture-PCR assay based on combination of A549 and BGMK cell lines and molecular identification as a tool to monitor infectious adenoviruses and Enteroviruses in river water. Appl Environ Microbiol 2004. 70: 6695-6705.

Traore O, Arnal C, Mignotte B, Maul A, Laveran H, et al. Reverse transcriptase PCR detection of astrovirus, Hepatitis A virus and Poliovirus in experimentally contaminated mussels: comparison of several extraction and concentration method. App Environ Microb 1998;64: 3118-3122.

Grabow WOK., Botma KL, Villiers JC, Clay CG, Erasmus B. Assessment of cell culture and polymerase chain reaction procedures for the detection of Polioviruses in wastewater. Bul WHO 1999; 12: 23-24.

Lee HK and Jeong YS. Comparison of total culturable virus assay and multiplex integrated cell culture-PCR for reliability of waterborne virus detection. App Environ Microb 2004; 70: 3632-3636.

Straub T, Pepper IL, Gerba A. Comparison of PCR and cell culture for detection of Enteroviruses in sludge- amended field soils and determination of their transport; AppEnviron Microb 1995; 61: 2066-2068.

Khelifi H, Belghith K, Aouni M. Comparison of cell culture and RT-PCR for the detection of Enterovirus in sewage and shellfish. Pathol Biol 2006; 54: 280-284.

Buck GE, Wiesemann M, Stewart L. Comparison of mixed cell culture containing genetically engineered BGMK and CaCo-2 cells (Super E-Mix) with RT-PCR and conventional cell culture for the diagnosis of En- terovirus meningitis. J Clin Virol 2002; 25: 13-18.

Kim YH, Yang I, Bae Y, Park S. Performance evalua- tion of thermal cyclers for PCR in a rapid cycling condi- tion. Bio Techniques 2008; 44:495-505.

Maekawa M., Sudo K. and Kanno T. Search for improved electrophoretic conditions for PCR--single- strand conformation polymorphism analysis: is an SDS buffer condition useful. Genome Res 1993; 3: 130-132.

Beaulieux F, Berger MM, Tcheng R, Giraud P, Lina B.RNA extraction and RT-PCR procedures adapted for the detection of Enterovirus sequences from frozen and paraffin-embedded formalin-fixed spinal cord samples. J ViroMethods 2003; 107: 115-120.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.