ABSTRACT
After the havoc created by Spanish flu a century ago, the world is witnessing exactly a similar pandemic situation since the beginning of the year 2020. The unexplained respiratory illness with high morbidity & mortality which started in Wuhan, China and spread across the world was finally termed as COVID-19 disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 and later announced as pandemic by WHO. This novel virus SARS-CoV-2 is a new variant of SARS corona virus with high infectivity and mysterious pathophysiology. The major step towards containment of this pandemic is to scale up the testing for SARS-CoV-2 and thereby isolating and managing the patients at the earliest. Molecular amplification based methods such a Real time Polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), CBNAAT and TrueNAT are the most commonly used techniques for detection of SARS-CoV2. To utilize these diagnostic facilities optimally in the management of the suspected COVID 19 patients, it is of utmost importance for the healthcare providers to understand the intricacies related to these technologies. Thus, the technical details along with the pros & cons of these three amplification-based technologies for proper understanding of these diagnostic modalities for SARS COV-2 diagnosis are discussed herewith.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The entire globe is undergoing an unprecedented challenge of COVID-19. Considering the need of rapid and accurate diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2, this study was planned to evaluate the cost effective extraction free RT-PCR technique in comparison to the standard VTM based RT-qPCR method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Paired swabs from nasopharynx and oropharynx were collected for SARS-CoV-2 testing, from 211 adult patients (≥18 years) in VTM and plain sterile tubes (dry swabs). These samples were processed and RT-qPCR was carried out as per standard protocols. RESULTS: 54.5% of the patients were females and 45.5% were males with sex ratio 1:1.19 (M: F). 38.86% were symptomatic, of which fever (86.59%), cough (79.23%) and breathlessness (46.34%) were the most common symptoms. The positivity by VTM based method and index method was 31.27% and 13.27% respectively. Of the 27 inconclusive results from index method, 37.04% were positive, 48.15% were negative by VTM based method. However, in 40 inconclusive results by VTM based method, 90% were negative and rest remained inconclusive by index method. The sensitivity and specificity of the index method were 39.39% and 85.71% respectively. The overall agreement between VTM based method and index method was 49.59% with estimated Kappa value of 0.19. CONCLUSION: VTM based method showed higher sensitivity compared to the index method. The higher positivity by VTM based method, suggests that VTM based method could plausibly be a better detection method of SARS-CoV-2. Still, the index method might add value in a resource limited setups for detection of SARS-CoV-2.
