Suppr超能文献

新型冠状病毒检测试剂盒诊断性能评估:一项对比研究。

Evaluation of diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection kits: a comparative study.

作者信息

Sherif Basma, Hafez Hala M, Abdelhalim Marwa Ramadan, Elwafa Menna Allah Zakaria Abou, Wahba Nancy Samir, Hamdy Perihan

机构信息

Clinical Pathology Department, Faculty of Medicine Ain Shams University Hospitals, Cairo, Egypt.

Faculty of Medicine Ain Shams University Hospitals, Cairo, Egypt.

出版信息

Beni Suef Univ J Basic Appl Sci. 2023;12(1):17. doi: 10.1186/s43088-023-00360-1. Epub 2023 Feb 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has hit many countries worldwide. Rapid and accurate diagnosis is crucial to reduce disease burden. Many commercial kits have become available, but their performance needs to be assessed. This study aimed at evaluation of the diagnostic performance of real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Rapid Antigen detection (RAD) kits for detecting Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Five hundred sixty-four Nasopharyngeal swab specimens sent to Molecular Laboratory at Ain Shams University Specialized Hospital for SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing collected from 564 subjects who attended the outpatient clinic for sample collection were randomly selected. All samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 PCR using Viasure. Each time a recent kit was introduced, 94 samples, previously tested using Viasure, were used to determine the performance characteristics of the recent kit in comparison with Viasure, including Fast Track Diagnostics (FTD), DNA Technology, QiaPrep, Xpress SARS-CoV-2, ID NOW COVID-19 assay and Artron COVID-19 Antigen test kit.

RESULTS

Upon comparison, FTD, DNA Technology, QiaPrep, Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and ID Now showed positive percent agreement, 100%, 100%, 97.7%, 100%, 100% negative percent agreement, 86%, 100%, 98.8%, 90%, 100%, respectively. The RAD kit results, when compared with RT-PCR, showed high sensitivity at cycle threshold (Ct) < 30, low sensitivity at Ct ≥ 30, while specificity was 100%.

CONCLUSION

Fast track, DNA Technology, QiaPrep, Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and ID Now showed good diagnostic performance. Positive RAD rule in SARS-CoV-2 infection, however negative results should be correlated with clinical condition and molecular testing.

摘要

背景

2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行已席卷全球许多国家。快速准确的诊断对于减轻疾病负担至关重要。许多商业试剂盒已上市,但它们的性能需要评估。本研究旨在评估实时聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)和快速抗原检测(RAD)试剂盒检测严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)的诊断性能。从564名到门诊进行样本采集的受试者中随机选取了564份送往艾因夏姆斯大学专科医院分子实验室进行SARS-CoV-2 PCR检测的鼻咽拭子标本。所有样本均使用Viasure进行SARS-CoV-2 PCR检测。每次引入新试剂盒时,都会使用94份先前用Viasure检测过的样本,以确定新试剂盒与Viasure相比的性能特征,包括快速通道诊断(FTD)、DNA技术、QiaPrep、Xpress SARS-CoV-2、ID NOW COVID-19检测和雅创COVID-19抗原检测试剂盒。

结果

经比较,FTD、DNA技术、QiaPrep、Xpress SARS-CoV-2和ID Now的阳性百分一致性分别为100%、100%、97.7%、100%、100%,阴性百分一致性分别为86%、100%、98.8%、90%、100%。与RT-PCR相比,RAD试剂盒结果在循环阈值(Ct)<30时显示高灵敏度,在Ct≥30时显示低灵敏度,而特异性为100%。

结论

快速通道、DNA技术、QiaPrep、Xpress SARS-CoV-2和ID Now显示出良好的诊断性能。然而,SARS-CoV-2感染中RAD阳性结果可作为诊断依据,阴性结果应与临床情况和分子检测结果相结合。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

5
Antigen tests for COVID-19.新型冠状病毒肺炎抗原检测
Biophys Physicobiol. 2021 Feb 10;18:28-39. doi: 10.2142/biophysico.bppb-v18.004. eCollection 2021.
8
Evaluation of rapid antigen test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus.SARS-CoV-2 病毒快速抗原检测评估。
J Clin Virol. 2020 Aug;129:104500. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104500. Epub 2020 Jun 8.

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