Gracienta Tiara Josephine, Herardi Ryan, Santosa Frans, Pasiak Taufiq Fredrik, Tjang Yanto Sandy
Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta, Indonesia.
Arch Med Sci. 2021 May 9;18(4):949-957. doi: 10.5114/aoms/135910. eCollection 2022.
The rapid transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requires a fast, accurate, and affordable detection method. Despite doubts of their diagnostic accuracy, rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are used worldwide due to their practicality. This systematic review aims to determine the diagnostic accuracy of antibody-based RDTs in detecting COVID-19.
A literature search was carried out on five journal databases using the PRISMA-P 2015 method. We included all studies published up to February 2021. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies. Data regarding peer-review status, study design, test kit information, immunoglobulin class, target antigen, and the number of samples were extracted and tabulated. We estimated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) with a 95% confidence interval.
Thirty-three studies met the eligibility criteria. The pooled data results showed that the combined detection method of IgM or IgG had the highest sensitivity and NPV, which were 73.41% (95% CI: 72.22-74.57) and 75.34% (95% CI: 74.51-76.16), respectively. The single IgG detection method had the highest specificity and PPV of 96.68% (95% CI: 96.25-97.07) and 95.97% (95% CI: 95.47-96.42%), respectively.
Antibody-based RDTs are not satisfactory as primary diagnostic tests but have utility as a screening tool.
2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的快速传播需要一种快速、准确且经济实惠的检测方法。尽管对其诊断准确性存在疑虑,但快速诊断测试(RDT)因其实用性在全球范围内被广泛使用。本系统评价旨在确定基于抗体的RDT检测COVID-19的诊断准确性。
采用PRISMA-P 2015方法在五个期刊数据库中进行文献检索。纳入截至2021年2月发表的所有研究。使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所(JBI)诊断测试准确性研究的批判性评价清单评估偏倚风险。提取并列表关于同行评审状态、研究设计、检测试剂盒信息、免疫球蛋白类别、靶抗原和样本数量的数据。我们估计了合并敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)及其95%置信区间。
33项研究符合纳入标准。合并数据结果显示,IgM或IgG联合检测方法具有最高的敏感度和NPV,分别为73.41%(95%CI:72.22-74.57)和75.34%(95%CI:74.51-76.16)。单一IgG检测方法具有最高的特异度和PPV,分别为96.68%(95%CI:96.25-97.07)和95.97%(95%CI:95.47-96.42%)。
基于抗体的RDT作为主要诊断测试并不令人满意,但可作为一种筛查工具。