Suppr超能文献

三种用于检测呼吸道病毒感染的商业多重检测方法的评估。

Evaluation of three commercial multiplex assays for the detection of respiratory viral infections.

作者信息

Radko Sandi, Ian Stuart J, Zahariadis George

机构信息

Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.

Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

J Virol Methods. 2017 Oct;248:39-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2017.06.006. Epub 2017 Jun 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Timely identification of respiratory virus infection is essential to mitigate inappropriate antibiotic use and to implement appropriate treatment and/or infection control procedures. As such, multiplexed PCR assays have become standard in many virology laboratories.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the Seeplex RV15 (test of record) with two newer generation multiplex assays, the Anyplex II RV16 and the xTAG respiratory virus panels.

STUDY DESIGN

Two hundred and three retrospective and 36 prospective respiratory samples were tested by all three assays. Samples were deemed to be positive if they tested positive for a virus by at least two of the three respective assays. Negative samples also had to test negative by at least two of the three assays. Inconclusive samples were those that showed band signal intensity between 0 and 100 on the RV15, but had not been previously tested on the RV16 or xTAG.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Overall sensitivity and specificity of all three assays were similar (∼85% and 100%, respectively). Given each assay can identify multiple different viruses, the targets reported by one assay did not always agree with each target from another assay. Partial discordant rates were 47% and 21% for positive and negative samples, respectively. These higher than expected partial discordant rates may be due to primer or chemistry differences amongst the three multiplex assays.

摘要

背景

及时识别呼吸道病毒感染对于减少不适当的抗生素使用以及实施适当的治疗和/或感染控制程序至关重要。因此,多重聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测已成为许多病毒学实验室的标准检测方法。

目的

将Seeplex RV15(记录检测方法)与两种新一代多重检测方法Anyplex II RV16和xTAG呼吸道病毒检测板进行比较。

研究设计

所有三种检测方法对203份回顾性呼吸道样本和36份前瞻性呼吸道样本进行了检测。如果样本在三种各自的检测方法中至少有两种检测出病毒阳性,则判定为阳性。阴性样本在三种检测方法中也必须至少有两种检测为阴性。不确定样本是指在RV15检测中显示条带信号强度在0至100之间,但之前未在RV16或xTAG上进行检测的样本。

结果与结论

所有三种检测方法的总体敏感性和特异性相似(分别约为85%和100%)。鉴于每种检测方法都能识别多种不同病毒,一种检测方法报告的靶标并不总是与另一种检测方法的每个靶标一致。阳性和阴性样本的部分不一致率分别为47%和21%。这些高于预期的部分不一致率可能是由于三种多重检测方法之间的引物或化学差异所致。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

2
Viral and bacterial aetiology of community-acquired pneumonia in adults.成人社区获得性肺炎的病毒和细菌病因学。
Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2013 Jul;7(4):567-73. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-2659.2012.00425.x. Epub 2012 Aug 22.
9
Performance of diagnostic tests to detect respiratory viruses in older adults.老年患者呼吸道病毒检测诊断试验的性能。
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2010 Jul;67(3):246-50. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2010.02.020.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验