Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Cureus ; 15(3): e36962, 2023 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37131571

ABSTRACT

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that emerged in late 2019 continues to spread globally. Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), which is considered the gold standard for diagnosis, does not always indicate contagiousness. This study was planned to evaluate the performance of the rapid antigen test (RAT) with the duration of symptoms and the usefulness of these tests in determining the infectivity of patients by performing sub-genomic RT-PCR. Methodology This prospective, observational study was designed to compare the diagnostic value of the COVID-19 RAT (SD Biosensor, Korea) with COVID-19 RT-PCR (Thermo Fisher, USA) by serial testing of patients. To evaluate the infectivity of the virus, sub-genomic RT-PCR was performed on previous RAT and RT-PCR-positive samples. Results Of 200 patients, 102 were positive on both RT-PCR and RAT, with 87 patients serially followed and tested. The sensitivity and specificity of RAT were 92.73% and 93.33%, respectively, in symptomatic patients. The mean duration of RAT positivity was 9.1 days, and the mean duration of RT-PCR positivity was 12.6 days. Sub-genomic RT-PCR test was performed on samples that were reported to be positive by RAT, and 73/87 (83.9%) patients were found to be positive. RAT was positive in symptomatic patients whose duration of illness was less than 10 days or those with a cycle threshold value below 32. Conclusions Thus, RAT can be used as the marker of infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic patients, especially in healthcare workers.

2.
PLoS One ; 16(10): e0257834, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34644333

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 testing is required before admission of a patient in the hospitals, invasive procedures, major and minor surgeries etc. Real Time Polymerase chain reaction is the gold standard test for the diagnosis, but requires well equipped biosafety laboratory along with trained manpower. In this study we have evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of novel TrueNat molecular assay for detecting SARS CoV-2. TrueNat is a chip-based real time PCR test and works on portable, light weight, battery powered equipment and can be used in remote areas with poor infrastructure. In this study 1807 patients samples were collected for both TrueNat and RTPCR COVID-19 testing during study period. Of these 174 (9.7%) and 174 (15%) were positive by RTPCR and TrueNat respectively and taking results of RTPCR as gold standard TrueNat test showed a sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of 69.5, 90.9% and 89.2% respectively. It can be concluded that TrueNat is a simple, easy to use, good rapid molecular diagnostic test for diagnosis of COVID-19 especially in resource limited settings and will prove to be a game changer of molecular diagnostics in future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Point-of-Care Systems , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction/instrumentation , Retrospective Studies , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/instrumentation , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Sensitivity and Specificity
3.
J Med Virol ; 93(4): 2281-2286, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33230819

ABSTRACT

There are more than 350 real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) testing kits commercially available but these kits have not been evaluated for pooled sample testing. Thus, this study was planned to compare and evaluate seven commercially available kits for pooled samples testing. Diagnostic accuracy of (1) TRUPCR SARS-CoV-2 Kit (Black Bio), (2) TaqPath RT-PCR COVID-19 Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific), (3) Allplex 2019-nCOV Assay (Seegene), (4) Patho detect COVID-19 PCR kit (My Lab), (5) LabGun COVID-19 RT-PCR Kit (Lab Genomics, Korea), (6) Fosun COVID-19 RT-PCR detection kit (Fosun Ltd.), (7) Real-time Fluorescent RT-PCR kit for SARS CoV-2 (BGI) was evaluated on precharacterised 40 positive and 10 negative COVID-19 sample pools. All seven kits detected all sample pools with low Ct values (<30); while testing weak positive pooled samples with high Ct value (>30); the TRUPCR Kit, TaqPath Kit, Allplex Assay, and BGI RT-PCR kit showed 100% sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. However, the Fosun kit, LabGun Kit, and Patho detect kit could detect only 90%, 85%, and 75% of weakly positive samples, respectively. We conclude that all seven commercially available RT-PCR kits included in this study can be used for routine molecular diagnosis of COVID-19. However, regarding performing pooled sample testing, it might be advisable to use those kits that performed best regarding positive identification in samples' pool, that is TRUPCR SARS-CoV-2 Kit, TaqPath RT-PCR COVID-19 Kit, Allplex 2019-nCOV Assay, and BGI Real-time RT-PCR kit for detecting SARS CoV-2.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/epidemiology , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Humans , India/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , RNA, Viral/analysis , RNA, Viral/genetics , Republic of Korea , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Sensitivity and Specificity , World Health Organization
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...