Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis ; 101(4): 115518, 2021 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34481324

RESUMO

We compared the performance of the Abbott Real Time SARS-CoV-2 assay (Abbott assay), Aptima™ SARS-CoV-2 assay (Aptima assay), BGI Real-Time SARS-CoV-2 assay (BGI assay), Lyra® SARS-CoV-2 assay (Lyra assay), and DiaSorin Simplexa™ COVID assay for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Residual nasopharyngeal samples (n = 201) submitted for routine SARS-CoV-2 testing by Simplexa assay during June-July 2020 and January 2021 were salvaged. Aliquots were tested on other assays and compared against the CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR assay. Viral load in positive samples was determined by droplet digital PCR. Among 201 samples, 99 were positive and 102 were negative by the CDC assay. The Aptima and Abbott assays exhibited the highest positive percent agreement (PPA) at 98.9% while the BGI assay demonstrated the lowest PPA of 89.9% with 10 missed detections. Negative percent agreement for all 5 platforms was comparable, ranging from 96.1% to 100%. The performance of all five assays was comparable.


Assuntos
Teste para COVID-19/métodos , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular/métodos , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , COVID-19/virologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Nasofaringe/virologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Carga Viral , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA