Abstract

In situ hybridisation, immunohistochemistry, and morphological analysis for the detection of cytomegalovirus (CMV) were compared in routinely processed tissue sections from a patient with acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) and widespread CMV infection. Both in situ hybridisation and immunohistochemistry with the monoclonal antibody CCH2 labelled all "owl's eye" cells intensely and, in addition, nuclei of some morphologically normal cells. Quantitative evaluation of the results showed that in situ hybridisation and immunohistochemistry with CCH2 were considerably more sensitive than purely morphological analysis, particularly in tissues with only a few cells infected by CMV. It is further shown that immunohistochemistry with CCH2 detected a higher figure of CMV infected cells than in situ hybridisation. In conclusion, both in situ hybridisation and immunohistochemistry are rapid, sensitive, and specific methods for CMV detection. For routine purposes, however, immunohistochemistry seems to be more suitable.