Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Comparison of Antigen Tests and qPCR in Rapid Diagnostics of Infections Caused by SARS-CoV-2 Virus.
Klajmon, Adrianna; Olechowska-Jarzab, Aldona; Salamon, Dominika; Sroka-Oleksiak, Agnieszka; Brzychczy-Wloch, Monika; Gosiewski, Tomasz.
  • Klajmon A; Department of Molecular Biology, John Paul II Hospital, ul. Pradnicka 80, 31-202 Kraków, Poland.
  • Olechowska-Jarzab A; Department of Microbiology, John Paul II Hospital, ul. Pradnicka 80, 31-202 Kraków, Poland.
  • Salamon D; Department of Molecular Medical Microbiology, Chair of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, ul. Czysta 18, 31-121 Krakow, Poland.
  • Sroka-Oleksiak A; Department of Molecular Medical Microbiology, Chair of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, ul. Czysta 18, 31-121 Krakow, Poland.
  • Brzychczy-Wloch M; Department of Molecular Medical Microbiology, Chair of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, ul. Czysta 18, 31-121 Krakow, Poland.
  • Gosiewski T; Department of Molecular Medical Microbiology, Chair of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, ul. Czysta 18, 31-121 Krakow, Poland.
Viruses ; 14(1)2021 12 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1580413
ABSTRACT
Diagnostics of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using molecular techniques from the collected respiratory swab specimens requires well-equipped laboratory and qualified personnel, also it needs several hours of waiting for results and is expensive. Antigen tests appear to be faster and cheaper but their sensitivity and specificity are debatable. The aim of this study was to compare a selected antigen test with quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) tests results. Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected from 192 patients with COVID-19 symptoms. All samples were tested using Vitassay qPCR SARS-CoV-2 kit and the Humasis COVID-19 Ag Test (MedSun) antigen immunochromatographic test simultaneously. Ultimately, 189 samples were tested; 3 samples were excluded due to errors in taking swabs. The qPCR and antigen test results were as follows 47 positive and 142 negative, and 45 positive and 144 negative, respectively. Calculated sensitivity of 91.5% and specificity of 98.6% for the antigen test shows differences which are not statistically significant in comparison to qPCR. Our study showed that effectiveness of the antigen tests in rapid laboratory diagnostics is high enough to be an alternative and support for nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) in the virus replication phase in the course of COVID-19.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: COVID-19 Testing / SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Prognostic study Limits: Humans Language: English Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: V14010017

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: COVID-19 Testing / SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Prognostic study Limits: Humans Language: English Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: V14010017