Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Virol J ; 19(1): 188, 2022 11 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2117139


INTRODUCTION: We investigated the performance of the cobas® 6800 system and cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B, a fully automated molecular testing system for influenza viruses and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This enabled an assay in a batch of 96 samples in approximately 3 h. METHODS: An assay was performed using the cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B on the cobas 6800 system for samples collected in four facilities between November 2019 and March 2020 in our previous study. The results were compared with those obtained using the reference methods. RESULTS: Of the 127 samples analyzed, the cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B detected influenza A virus in 75 samples, of which 73 were positive using the reference methods. No false negative results were observed. The overall positive and negative percent agreement for influenza A virus detection were 100.0% and 96.3%, respectively. There were no positive results for the influenza B virus or SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: The cobas 6800 system and cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B showed high accuracy for influenza A virus detection and can be useful for clinical laboratories, especially those that routinely assay many samples.

COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , Orthomyxoviridae , Humans , Influenza, Human/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques
J Infect Chemother ; 27(6): 820-825, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1045151


INTRODUCTION: Digital immunoassays (DIAs) and molecular point-of-care (POC) tests for influenza were recently developed. We aimed to evaluate and compare the positive rate with molecular POC tests and DIAs in detecting influenza virus A, B and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted in 2019-2020. Nasopharyngeal swab samples were collected from adult outpatients with influenza-like illness who visited four hospitals and clinics in Japan. DIAs were performed at each facility. The clinical diagnosis was determined based on the findings of DIAs, history taking, and physical assessment. Molecular POC test and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) were performed later. RESULTS: A total of 182 patients were evaluated. The positive rate for influenza virus with molecular POC test was significantly higher than that with DIAs (51.6% versus 40.7%, p = 0.046). In patients who tested positive for influenza virus with only molecular POC test, the presence of influenza virus was confirmed by RT-PCR. In a comparison between the patients who were positive for influenza virus with only molecular POC test and those with both molecular POC test and DIA, the percentage of patients who sought consultation within 18 h after the onset of symptoms was significantly higher in the molecular POC test only group than in the both methods group (70.0% versus 43.2%, p = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: A molecular POC test could contribute to the accurate diagnosis of influenza in patients with influenza-like illness, especially those who visited a hospital immediately after the onset of symptoms.

Influenza A virus , Influenza, Human , Orthomyxoviridae , Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections , Adult , Humans , Immunoassay , Influenza A virus/genetics , Influenza B virus/genetics , Influenza, Human/diagnosis , Japan , Orthomyxoviridae/genetics , Point-of-Care Systems , Point-of-Care Testing , Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections/diagnosis , Sensitivity and Specificity