Suppr超能文献

商业试剂盒对 COVID-19 实验室诊断的比较:RT-PCR 对 RT-LAMP 的有效性。

Comparison of COVID-19 laboratory diagnosis by commercial kits: Effectivity of RT-PCR to the RT-LAMP.

机构信息

Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Health, Health Institutes of Turkey (TUSEB), COVID-19 Diagnostic Center, University of Health Sciences, Kanuni Sultan Süleyman Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Küçükçekmece, Turkey.

Private Viromed Istanbul Central Laboratory and Imaging Center, COVID-19 Diagnostic Center, Istanbul, Şişli, Turkey.

出版信息

J Med Virol. 2022 May;94(5):1998-2007. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27559. Epub 2022 Jan 21.

Abstract

Coronavirus disease 2019 or COVID-19 caused by novel coronavirus/severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 or 2019-nCoV) is an ongoing pandemic that has emerging global effects and requires rapid and reliable diagnostic testing. Quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (q-RT-PCR) is the gold standard method for SARS-CoV-2 detections. On the other hand, new approaches remedy the diagnosis difficulties gradually. Reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) as one of these novel approaches may also contribute to faster and cheaper field-based testing. The present study was designed to evaluate this rapid screening diagnostic test that can give results in 30-45 min and to compare the effectiveness of LAMP to the q-RT-PCR. The 30 randomly chosen patient samples were generated by nasopharyngeal swabs with a portion of the SARS-CoV-2 nucleic sequence. The sample of quantification cycle (Cq) values was tested using RT-LAMP as well as by conventional q-RT-PCR. The patient samples were tested with four different kits (SENSObiz COVID-19 [SARS-CoV-2] LAMP Assay, the QIAseq DIRECT SARS-CoV-2 kit, Biospeedy SARS-CoV-2 Variant Plus kit, and CoVirion-CV19-2 SARS-CoV-2 OneStep RT-PCR kit) and two different PCR devices (GDS Rotor-Gene Q Thermocycler and Inovia Technologies GenX series). Based on 30 patient samples, the positive/negative ratio (P/N) was 30/0 as Biospeedy and Covirion (positivity 100%), 28/2 as Qiagen kit (positivity 93.3%) for the samples studied on the Inovia device while the same samples on the Rotor-Gene device were 30/0 as Biospeedy and Covirion (positivity 100%), 29/1 as Qiagen kit at the first day (96.7%). On the fifth day, the samples were studied in the Inovia device and the respective results were obtained: 27/3 as Biospeedy (positivity 90%), 16/14 as Qiagen (positivity 53.3%), 28/2 as Covirion kit (positivity 93.3%). When these samples were studied in the Rotor-Gene device, it was 29/1 in Biospeedy and Covirion (positivity 96.7%), 19/11 in the Qiagen kit (positivity 63.3%). When these samples were compared with the LAMP method it was found to be 19/11 (positivity 63.3%) on the first day and 18/12 (positivity 60%) on the fifth day. SARS-CoV-2 test studies will contribute to a proactive approach to the development of rapid diagnosis systems. The LAMP approach presents promising results to monitor exposed individuals and also improves screening efforts in potential ports of entry.

摘要

新型冠状病毒(SARS-CoV-2 或 2019-nCoV)引起的 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)是一种正在持续蔓延的全球大流行疾病,需要快速可靠的诊断检测。定量逆转录聚合酶链反应(q-RT-PCR)是检测 SARS-CoV-2 的金标准方法。另一方面,新方法逐渐弥补了诊断上的困难。逆转录环介导等温扩增(RT-LAMP)作为这些新方法之一,也有助于更快、更便宜的现场检测。本研究旨在评估这种快速筛查诊断检测方法,该方法可在 30-45 分钟内得出结果,并比较 LAMP 与 q-RT-PCR 的效果。从 30 名随机选择的患者中采集鼻咽拭子样本,其中部分含有 SARS-CoV-2 核酸序列。使用 RT-LAMP 以及常规 q-RT-PCR 对样本的定量循环(Cq)值进行了测试。使用四个不同的试剂盒(SENSObiz COVID-19[SARS-CoV-2]LAMP 检测试剂盒、QIAseq DIRECT SARS-CoV-2 试剂盒、Biospeedy SARS-CoV-2 Variant Plus 试剂盒和 CoVirion-CV19-2 SARS-CoV-2 OneStep RT-PCR 试剂盒)和两个不同的 PCR 设备(GDS Rotor-Gene Q 热循环仪和 Inovia Technologies GenX 系列)对患者样本进行了测试。基于 30 个患者样本,Biospeedy 和 Covirion 的阳性/阴性比值(P/N)为 30/0(阳性率 100%),Qiagen 试剂盒的阳性率为 28/2(阳性率 93.3%),用于研究的样本在 Inovia 设备上,而相同的样本在 Rotor-Gene 设备上的 P/N 为 30/0(阳性率 100%),Biospeedy 和 Covirion 的阳性率为 29/1(阳性率 96.7%)。第五天,在 Inovia 设备上研究了这些样本,得到了以下结果:Biospeedy 的阳性率为 27/3(阳性率 90%),Qiagen 的阳性率为 16/14(阳性率 53.3%),Covirion 试剂盒的阳性率为 28/2(阳性率 93.3%)。当这些样本在 Rotor-Gene 设备上进行研究时,Biospeedy 和 Covirion 的阳性率为 29/1(阳性率 96.7%),Qiagen 试剂盒的阳性率为 19/11(阳性率 63.3%)。当将这些样本与 LAMP 方法进行比较时,第一天的阳性率为 19/11(阳性率 63.3%),第五天的阳性率为 18/12(阳性率 60%)。SARS-CoV-2 检测研究将有助于采取主动方法开发快速诊断系统。LAMP 方法具有监测暴露人群的良好前景,也有助于提高潜在入境口岸的筛查力度。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验