Evaluation of a smartphone-operated point-of-care device using loop-mediated isothermal amplification technology for rapid and remote detection of SARS-CoV-2.

During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, rapid and sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 has been of high importance for outbreak control. Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the current gold standard, however, the procedures require an equipped laboratory setting and personnel, which have been regularly overburdened during the pandemic. This often resulted in long waiting times for patients. In contrast, reverse transcriptase loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) is a simple, cost-efficient, and fast procedure, allowing for rapid and remote detection of SARS-CoV-2. In the current study, we performed a clinical evaluation of a new point-of-care test system based on LAMP-technology for SARS-CoV-2 detection, providing a result within 25 min (1copy™ COVID-19 MDx Kit Professional system). We tested 112 paired nasopharyngeal swabs, collected in the COVID-19 Ghent University Hospital test center, using the 1copy™ COVID-19 MDx Kit Professional system, and RT-PCR as the reference method. The test system was found to have a clinical sensitivity of 93.24% (69/74) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 84.93%-97.77%) and specificity of 97.37% (37/38) (95% CI: 86.19%-99.93%). Due to its easy smartphone operation and ready-to-use reagents, it ought to be easily applied in for instance general practices, pharmacies, nursing homes, schools, and companies. This would facilitate an efficient SARS-CoV-2 outbreak control and quarantine policy, as diagnosis can occur sooner in a near-patient setting.

Urine transfer devices may impact urinary particle results: a pre-analytical study.

OBJECTIVES: Well-standardized procedures in the pre-analytical phase of urine diagnostics is of utmost importance to obtain reliable results. We investigated the effect of different urine collection methods and the associated urine transfer tubes on urine test strip and particle results. METHODS: In total, 146 selected urine samples were subdivided into three different collection containers and subsequently transferred into its accompanying transfer tube (BD, Greiner, Sarstedt vacuum and Sarstedt aspiration). As reference, the original urine sample was directly measured on the analyser. Both chemical test strip analysis (Sysmex UC-3500) and fluorescence flow cytometry particle analysis (Sysmex UF-5000) were performed on all samples. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in test strip results were found between the studied transfer methods. On the contrary, transfer of urine samples to the secondary tubes affected their particle counts. Clinically significant reductions in counts of renal tubular epithelial cells and hyaline casts were observed using the BD and Greiner transfer tubes and in counts of pathological casts using the BD, Greiner and Sarstedt vacuum tubes. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that the use of urine transfer tubes may impact counts of fragile urine particles. Clinical laboratories need to be aware about the variation that urine collection methods can induce on urine particle counts.