Table 2 Comparison of various diagnostic methods for CPV detection
From: Canine papillomavirus: status of diagnostic methods and vaccine innovations
Method | Sensitivity | Specificity | Strengths | Limitations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
H&E | Low | Low | Basic morphological assessment | Cannot identify specific viral types |
PCR | High | High | Rapid, highly sensitive, type-specific | Primer/probe design; not spatially resolved |
RCA | Moderate | Moderate | Amplifies entire viral genomes | Prone to non-specific amplification |
ISH | Moderate | High | Locates viral DNA in tissue samples | Time-consuming sample preparation |
NGS | Very High | Very High | Comprehensive detection, identifies novel CPVs | High cost; computational expertise required |
IHC | Moderate | High | Visualizes viral proteins in tissues | Antibody availability, lower sensitivity |
ELISA | Moderate | Moderate-High | Simple, scalable, detects viral antigens | Requires high-quality antibodies |
TEM | Low-Moderate | Very High | Definitive visualization of viral particles | Costly, technically demanding |