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.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0257817, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1435623

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIM: We investigated the combination of rapid antigen detection (RAD) and RT-qPCR assays in a stepwise procedure to optimize the detection of COVID-19. METHODS: From August 2020 to November 2020, 43,399 patients were screened in our laboratory for COVID-19 diagnostic by RT-qPCR using nasopharyngeal swab. Overall, 4,691 of the 43,399 were found to be positive, and 200 were retrieved for RAD testing allowing comparison of diagnostic accuracy between RAD and RT-qPCR. Cycle threshold (Ct) and time from symptoms onset (TSO) were included as covariates. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, LR-, and LR+ of RAD compared with RT-qPCR were 72% (95%CI 62%-81%), 99% (95% CI95%-100%), 99% (95%CI 93%-100%), and 78% (95%CI 70%-85%), 0.28 (95%CI 0.21-0.39), and 72 (95%CI 10-208) respectively. Sensitivity was higher for patients with Ct ≤ 25 regardless of TSO: TSO ≤ 4 days 92% (95%CI 75%-99%), TSO > 4 days 100% (95%CI 54%-100%), and asymptomatic 100% (95%CI 78-100%). Overall, combining RAD and RT-qPCR would allow reducing from only 4% the number of RT-qPCR needed. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the risk of misdiagnosing COVID-19 in 28% of patients if RAD is used alone. A stepwise analysis that combines RAD and RT-qPCR would be an efficient screening procedure for COVID-19 detection and may facilitate the control of the outbreak.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Algorithms , Antigens, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/methods , Middle Aged , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Sensitivity and Specificity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL