Microbiology Unit, Canterbury Health Laboratories, Christchurch, New Zealand.
J Virol Methods. 2013 Aug;191(2):118-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2013.04.005. Epub 2013 Apr 11.
Multiplex PCR has become the test of choice for the detection of multiple respiratory viruses in clinical specimens. However, there are few direct comparisons of different PCR assays. This study compares 4 different multiplex PCR assays for the recovery of common respiratory viruses. We tested 213 respiratory specimens using four different multiplex PCR assays: the xTAG respiratory viral panel fast (Abbott Molecular Laboratories), Fast-track Respiratory Pathogen assay (Fast-track Diagnostics), Easyplex respiratory pathogen 12 kit (Ausdiagnostics), and an in-house multiplex real-time PCR assay. The performance of the four assays was very similar, with 93-100% agreement for all comparisons. Other issues, such as through-put, technical requirements and cost, are likely to be as important for making a decision about which of these assays to use given their comparative performance.
多重聚合酶链反应已成为检测临床标本中多种呼吸道病毒的首选方法。然而，很少有对不同聚合酶链反应检测方法的直接比较。本研究比较了 4 种不同的多重聚合酶链反应检测方法对常见呼吸道病毒的检测效果。我们使用 4 种不同的多重聚合酶链反应检测方法对 213 份呼吸道标本进行了检测：xTAG 呼吸道病毒快速检测试剂盒（Abbott Molecular Laboratories）、Fast-track 呼吸道病原体检测试剂盒（Fast-track Diagnostics）、Easyplex 呼吸道病原体 12 试剂盒（Ausdiagnostics）和一种内部多重实时聚合酶链反应检测方法。这 4 种检测方法的性能非常相似，所有比较的一致性均为 93%-100%。其他因素，如通量、技术要求和成本，可能与这些检测方法的比较性能一样重要，需要根据这些因素做出使用哪种检测方法的决定。
