Effectiveness of PCR and Immunofluorescence Techniques for Detecting Human Cytomegalovirus in Blood and Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid

  • A. Roży
  • K. Duk
  • B. Szumna
  • P. Skrońska
  • D. Gawryluk
  • J. Chorostowska-WynimkoEmail author
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 921)


Current diagnostic methods allow a rapid and reliable detection of active human cytomegalovirus (hCMV) infection by identifying the presence of pp65 CMV antigen or CMV DNA in peripheral blood and affected organs. The goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of CMV detection in blood and organ-specific biological material, such as bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF), by comparing two standard diagnostic methods, immunofluorescence (IF) and the real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). We evaluated 25 patients with concomitant respiratory disease who were referred to our hospital for diagnosis due to suspected acute CMV infection. The presence of hCMV was concomitantly evaluated by IF and PCR in 16 peripheral blood samples. In two patients, we observed positive results for both IF and PCR, and in two other patients the results were discordant. Of 11 patients, CMV DNA was detected in six BALF samples, and in one blood plasma sample. Real-time PCR detected CMV DNA in 54.6 % of BALF samples and 12.0 % of blood samples, while indirect IF testing confirmed antigenemia in 12.5 % of blood samples. The results from our study suggest that the IF method is as effective as PCR for detecting an ongoing CMV infection in blood samples. However, real-time PCR was much more effective at detecting CMV DNA in BALF compared to blood samples. Our results suggest that the biological material being tested during CMV diagnosis should be derived directly from the virally infected organ(s).


Blood Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid Human cytomegalovirus Lungs pp65 antigen Viral infection 



This study was performed as part of the scientific project (1/21) of the National Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases in Warsaw, Poland.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest in relation to this article.


  1. Bauer CC, Jaksch P, Aberle SW, Haber H, Lang G, Klepetko W, Hofmann H, Puchhammer-Stöckl E (2007) Relationship between cytomegalovirus DNA load in epithelial lining fluid and plasma of lung transplant recipients and analysis of coinfection with Epstein-Barr virus and human herpesvirus 6 in the lung compartment. J Clin Microbiol 45(2):324–328CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Chevillotte M, Landwehr S, Linta L, Frascaroli G, Lüske A, Buser C, Mertens T, von Einem J (2009) Major tegument protein pp 65 of human cytomegalovirus is required for the incorporation of pUL69 and pUL97 into the virus particle and for viral growth in macrophages. J Virol 83(6):2480–2490CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Dworniczak S, Ziora D, Kapral M, Mazurek U, Niepsuj G, Rauer R, Wilczok T, Kozielski J (2004) Human cytomegalovirus DNA level in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. J Physiol Pharmacol 55(Suppl 3):67–75PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Fajac A, Stéphan F, Ibrahim A, Gautier E, Bernaudin JF, Pico JL (1997) Value of cytomegalovirus detection by PCR in bronchoalveolar lavage routinely performed in asymptomatic bone marrow recipients. Bone Marrow Transplant 20(7):581–585CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Hansen KK, Vestbo J, Benfield T, Lundgren JD, Mathiesen LR (1997) Rapid detection of cytomegalovirus in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and serum samples by polymerase chain reaction: correlation of virus isolation and clinical outcome for patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Clin Infect Dis 24(5):878–883CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Jahan M (2010) Laboratory diagnosis of CMV infection: a review. Bangladesh J Med Microbiol 04(02):39–44Google Scholar
  7. Jones RP (2014) A study of an unexplained and large increase in respiratory deaths in England and Wales: is the pattern of diagnoses consistent with the potential involvement of cytomegalovirus? Br J Med Med Res 4(33):5193–5217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kwon S, Jung BK, Ko SY, Lee CK, Cho Y (2015) Comparison of quantitation of cytomegalovirus DNA by real-time PCR in whole blood with the cytomegalovirus antigenemia assay. Ann Lab Med 35:99–104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Poole E, Wills M, Sinclair J (2014) Human cytomegalovirus latency: targeting differences in the latently infected cell with a view to clearing latent infection. N J Sci 2014:10. doi: 10.1155/2014/313761 Google Scholar
  10. Ross SA, Novak Z, Pati S, Boppana SB (2011) Diagnosis of cytomegalovirus infections. Infect Disord Drug Targets 11(5):466–474CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Sinzger C, Digel M, Jahn G (2008) Cytomegalovirus cell tropism. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol 325:63–83PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Zipeto D, Revello MG, Silini E, Parea M, Percivalle E, Zavattoni M, Milanesi G, Gerna G (1992) Development and clinical significance of a diagnostic assay based on the polymerase chain reaction for detection of human cytomegalovirus DNA in blood samples from immunocompromised patients. J Clin Microbiol 30(2):527–530PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Roży
    • 1
  • K. Duk
    • 1
  • B. Szumna
    • 1
  • P. Skrońska
    • 1
  • D. Gawryluk
    • 2
  • J. Chorostowska-Wynimko
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Genetics and Clinical ImmunologyNational Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung DiseasesWarsawPoland
  2. 2.Third Department of Lung DiseaseNational Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung DiseasesWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations