Analysis of diagnostic performance and factors causing nonspecific reactions in SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen detection tests.
J Infect Chemother
; 29(2): 157-162, 2023 Feb.
Article
em En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-36288777
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION:
Early diagnosis and appropriate infection control are important to prevent the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this study, we aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen detection (RAD) tests and the factors that cause nonspecific reactions.METHODS:
Nasopharyngeal swab specimens (n = 100), sputum specimens (n = 10), and lithium-heparin plasma samples (n = 100) were collected. We evaluated Espline®SARS-CoV-2 (Espline) and SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test that also known as STANDARD Q® (STANDARD Q), with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Lumipulse® Presto SARS-CoV-2 Ag as reference tests. In addition, we investigated the effects of inadequate pretreatment methods and five potential causes of nonspecific reactions.RESULTS:
The sensitivities of Espline and STANDARD Q were 60% and 57%, respectively, and their specificity was 100%. It was confirmed that the judgment line for the positive insufficiently mixed specimens was faint. A false-positive result was observed with STANDARD Q when sputum was used as a specimen to investigate judgment the effect of viscosity.CONCLUSIONS:
Espline and STANDARD Q show good sensitivity for specimens with Ct values less than 25, but specimens collected within 9 days of symptom onset may still give false negatives. The test should be performed carefully, and the results should be judged comprehensively, taking into account clinical symptoms and patient background.Palavras-chave
Texto completo:
1
Coleções:
01-internacional
Base de dados:
MEDLINE
Assunto principal:
SARS-CoV-2
/
COVID-19
Tipo de estudo:
Diagnostic_studies
/
Screening_studies
Limite:
Humans
Idioma:
En
Ano de publicação:
2023
Tipo de documento:
Article