Search

Reveal®E. coli 2.0 is a new lateral-flow immunodiagnostic test for detection of E. coli O157:H7 and O157:NM in raw beef trim and ground beef. Compared with the original Reveal E. coli O157:H7 assay, the new test utilizes a unique antibody combination resulting in improved test specificity. The device architecture and test procedure have also been modified, and a single enrichment protocol was developed which allows the test to be performed at any point during an enrichment period of 12 to 20 h. Results of inclusivity and exclusivity testing showed that the test is specific for E. coli serotypes O157:H7 and O157:NM, with the exception of two strains of O157:H38 and one strain of O157:H43 which produced positive reactions. In internal and independent laboratory trials comparing the Reveal 2.0 method to the U.S. Department of Agriculture–Food Safety and Inspection Service reference culture procedure for detection of E. coli O157:H7 in 65 and 375 g raw beef trim and ground beef samples, there were no statistically significant differences in method performance with the exception of a single internal trial with 375 g ground beef samples in which the Reveal method produced significantly more positive results. There were no unconfirmed positive results by the Reveal assay, for specificity of 100%. Results of ruggedness testing showed that the Reveal test produces accurate results even with substantial deviation in sample volume or device incubation time or temperature. However, addition of the promoter reagent to the test sample prior to introducing the test device is essential to proper test performance.

Reveal Salmonella 2.0 is an improved version of the original Reveal Salmonella lateral flow immunoassay and is applicable to the detection of Salmonella enterica serogroups A-E in a variety of food and environmental samples. A Performance Tested Method validation study was conducted to compare performance of the Reveal 2.0 method with that of the U.S. Department of Agriculture-Food Safety and Inspection Service or U.S. Food and Drug Administration/Bacteriological Analytical Manual reference culture methods for detection of Salmonella spp. in chicken carcass rinse, raw ground turkey, raw ground beef, hot dogs, raw shrimp, a ready-to-eat meal product, dry pet food, ice cream, spinach, cantaloupe, peanut butter, stainless steel surface, and sprout irrigation water. In a total of 17 trials performed internally and four trials performed in an independent laboratory, there were no statistically significant differences in performance of the Reveal 2.0 and reference culture procedures as determined by Chi-square analysis, with the exception of one trial with stainless steel surface and one trial with sprout irrigation water where there were significantly more positive results by the Reveal 2.0 method. Considering all data generated in testing food samples using enrichment procedures specifically designed for the Reveal method, overall sensitivity of the Reveal method relative to the reference culture methods was 99%. In testing environmental samples, sensitivity of the Reveal method relative to the reference culture method was 164%. For select foods, use of the Reveal test in conjunction with reference method enrichment resulted in overall sensitivity of 92%. There were no unconfirmed positive results on uninoculated control samples in any trials for specificity of 100%. In inclusivity testing, 102 different Salmonella serovars belonging to serogroups A-E were tested and 99 were consistently positive in the Reveal test. In exclusivity testing of 33 strains of non-salmonellae representing 14 genera, 32 were negative when tested with Reveal following nonselective enrichment, and the remaining strain was found to be substantially inhibited by the enrichment media used with the Reveal method. Results of ruggedness testing showed that the Reveal test produces accurate results even with substantial deviation in sample volume or device development time.

Reveal Salmonella 2.0 is an improved version of the original Reveal Salmonella lateral flow immunoassay and is applicable to the detection of Salmonella enterica serogroups A–E in a variety of food and environmental samples. A Performance Tested MethodSM validation study was conducted to compare performance of the Reveal 2.0 method with that of the U.S. Department of Agriculture-Food Safety and Inspection Service or U.S. Food and Drug Administration/Bacteriological Analytical Manual reference culture methods for detection of Salmonella spp. in chicken carcass rinse, raw ground turkey, raw ground beef, hot dogs, raw shrimp, a ready-to-eat meal product, dry pet food, ice cream, spinach, cantaloupe, peanut butter, stainless steel surface, and sprout irrigation water. In a total of 17 trials performed internally and four trials performed in an independent laboratory, there were no statistically significant differences in performance of the Reveal 2.0 and reference culture procedures as determined by Chi-square analysis, with the exception of one trial with stainless steel surface and one trial with sprout irrigation water where there were significantly more positive results by the Reveal 2.0 method. Considering all data generated in testing food samples using enrichment procedures specifically designed for the Reveal method, overall sensitivity of the Reveal method relative to the reference culture methods was 99%. In testing environmental samples, sensitivity of the Reveal method relative to the reference culture method was 164%. For select foods, use of the Reveal test in conjunction with reference method enrichment resulted in overall sensitivity of 92%. There were no unconfirmed positive results on uninoculated control samples in any trials for specificity of 100%. In inclusivity testing, 102 different Salmonella serovars belonging to serogroups A–E were tested and 99 were consistently positive in the Reveal test. In exclusivity testing of 33 strains of non-salmonellae representing 14 genera, 32 were negative when tested with Reveal following nonselective enrichment, and the remaining strain was found to be substantially inhibited by the enrichment media used with the Reveal method. Results of ruggedness testing showed that the Reveal test produces accurate results even with substantial deviation in sample volume or device development time.

Five different food types were analyzed by the Reveal for E. coli O157:H7 8-Hour Test System (Reveal 8) and either the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Bacteriological Analytical Manual (BAM) culture method or the U.S. Department of Agriculture Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) culture method for the presence of E. coli O157:H7. A total of 27 laboratories representing academia and private industry in the United States and Canada participated. Food types were inoculated with E. coli O157:H7 at 2 different levels: a high level where predominantly positive results were expected, and a low level where fractional recovery was anticipated. During this study, 1110 samples and controls were analyzed by both the Reveal 8 and by BAM or FSIS by each of the collaborators (2220 samples in total). For each set of samples, 740 were artificially inoculated with E. coli O157:H7, and 370 were uninoculated controls. The Reveal 8 detected 528 presumptive positives of which 487 were confirmed positive by the BAM culture method. In comparison, BAM and FSIS detected 489 of the 740 artificially contaminated samples as positive. In an additional in-house study performed only on chilled and frozen raw ground beef, 240 artificially inoculated samples were analyzed by both the Reveal 8 and by FSIS. The Reveal 8 detected and confirmed 104 samples as positive compared to 79 confirmed positive by FSIS.

Four different food types along with environmental swabs were analyzed by the Reveal for E. coli O157:H7 test (Reveal) and the Bacteriological Analytical Manual (BAM) culture method for the presence of Escherichia coli O157:H7. Twenty-seven laboratories representing academia and private industry in the United States and Canada participated. Sample types were inoculated with E. coli O157:H7 at 2 different levels. Of the 1095 samples and controls analyzed and confirmed, 459 were positive and 557 were negative by both methods. No statistical differences (p