Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 1 de 1
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
J Virol Methods ; 295: 114199, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1253339

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 pandemic severely impacted the healthcare and economy on a global scale. It is widely recognized that mass testing is an efficient way to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection as well as aid in the development of informed policies for disease management. However, the current COVID-19 worldwide infection rates increased the demand for rapid and reliable screening of infection. We compared the performance of qRT-PCR in direct heat-inactivated (H), heat-inactivated and pelleted (HC) samples against RNA in a group of 74 subjects (44 positive and 30 negative). Then we compared the sensitivity of HC in a larger group of 196 COVID-19 positive samples. Our study suggests that HC samples show higher accuracy for SARS-CoV-2 detection PCR assay compared to direct H (89 % vs 83 % of the detection in RNA). The sensitivity of detection using direct samples varied depending on the sample transport and storage media as well as the viral loads (as measured by qRT-PCR Ct levels). Altogether, all the data suggest that purified RNA provides more accurate results, however, direct sample testing with qRT-PCR may help to significantly increase testing capacity. Switching to the direct sample testing is justified if the number of tests is doubled at least.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Mass Screening/methods , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Armenia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , RNA, Viral/genetics , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Sensitivity and Specificity , Specimen Handling , Viral Load , Virus Inactivation
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL