Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Evaluation of eleven rapid tests for detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2.
Tollånes, Mette C; Bakken Kran, Anne-Marte; Abildsnes, Eirik; Jenum, Pål A; Breivik, Anne C; Sandberg, Sverre.
Afiliação
  • Tollånes MC; Norwegian Organization for Quality Improvement of Laboratory Examinations, Haraldsplass Deaconess Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
  • Bakken Kran AM; Division of Infection Control and Environmental Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
  • Abildsnes E; Department of Microbiology, Oslo University Hospital Ullevål, Oslo, Norway.
  • Jenum PA; Kristiansand Municipality, Kristiansand, Norway.
  • Breivik AC; Norwegian Organization for Quality Improvement of Laboratory Examinations, Haraldsplass Deaconess Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
  • Sandberg S; Norwegian Organization for Quality Improvement of Laboratory Examinations, Haraldsplass Deaconess Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Clin Chem Lab Med ; 58(9): 1595-1600, 2020 08 27.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32598303
ABSTRACT

Objectives:

SARS-CoV-2, causing COVID-19, has emerged to cause a human pandemic. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory samples by using PCR is the standard laboratory diagnostic tool. Our aim was to perform a limited evaluation of the diagnostic performance and user-friendliness of eleven rapid tests for detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2.

Methods:

All participants were tested with PCR against SARS-CoV-2 at a clinical microbiology laboratory. Comparing with results from PCR tests, we evaluated the rapid tests' performances in three arms; 1) 20 hospitalized patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19, 2) 23 recovered outpatients with former PCR-confirmed COVID-19, and 3) 49 participants with suspected COVID-19 presenting at a primary care emergency room.

Results:

All eleven tests detected antibodies in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, though with varying sensitivities. In former outpatients recovered from COVID-19, there were differences between tests in the immunoglobulin type G (IgG) sensitivity, with five tests having a sensitivity below 65%. In participants with suspected COVID-19 infection, the rapid tests had very low sensitivities. Most rapid tests were easy to perform and interpret.

Conclusions:

Rapid tests were not suited as stand-alone tests to detect present infection in a Norwegian primary care emergency room population. All the rapid tests were able to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, although sensitivities varied and were generally higher in the study arm of more severely affected participants. Rapid tests with high IgG sensitivity (and specificity) may be useful for confirmation of past infection. An independent evaluation should be performed in the intended population before introducing a rapid test.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Pneumonia Viral / Infecções por Coronavirus / Betacoronavirus / Anticorpos Antivirais Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Evaluation_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Clin Chem Lab Med Assunto da revista: QUIMICA CLINICA / TECNICAS E PROCEDIMENTOS DE LABORATORIO Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Noruega

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Pneumonia Viral / Infecções por Coronavirus / Betacoronavirus / Anticorpos Antivirais Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Evaluation_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Clin Chem Lab Med Assunto da revista: QUIMICA CLINICA / TECNICAS E PROCEDIMENTOS DE LABORATORIO Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Noruega