Comparison between five PCR techniques for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2.
Rev Esp Quimioter
; 35(4): 401-405, 2022 Aug.
Article
in English
| MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1904218
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE:
Since the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 appeared, there have been numerous techniques that have been developed for the diagnosis or monitoring of infection, both direct and serological techniques. Choosing a good diagnostic tool is essential for epidemiological control. The objective was to compare five commercialized RT-PCR techniques in real time, in sensitivity, specificity and agreement for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.METHODS:
Five commercial RT-PCR kits for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 were compared. Eight known positive samples were taken and subjected to seven different dilutions or concentrations, and another 135 negative samples were used to determine sensitivity, specificity, and agreement values.RESULTS:
The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for the Palex, Roche and GeneXpert techniques with respect to Seegene were identical, corresponding to 98.21%, 100%, 100% and 99.26% respectively. For Becton Dickinson the sensitivity was 89.28%, the specificity of 100%, the PPV of 100% and the NPV of 95.74%. The agreement using the Kappa index for Palex, Roche and GeneXpert was 0.9892, while the agreement for Becton Dickinson was with a Kappa index of 0.9215.CONCLUSIONS:
All commercial RT-PCR kits had high sensitivities and specificities, as well as PPV, NPV, and concordance.Keywords
Full text:
Available
Collection:
International databases
Database:
MEDLINE
Main subject:
SARS-CoV-2
/
COVID-19
Type of study:
Diagnostic study
/
Observational study
/
Prognostic study
Limits:
Humans
Language:
English
Journal:
Rev Esp Quimioter
Journal subject:
Drug Therapy
Year:
2022
Document Type:
Article
Similar
MEDLINE
...
LILACS
LIS