Comparison of Rapid Antigen Test and Real-Time Reverse Transcriptase PCR for Diagnosing Novel Swine Influenza A (H1N1)

Aerin Kwon, Jae-Seok Kim, H. Kim, W. Song, J. Park, H. Cho, K. Lee
{"title":"Comparison of Rapid Antigen Test and Real-Time Reverse Transcriptase PCR for Diagnosing Novel Swine Influenza A (H1N1)","authors":"Aerin Kwon, Jae-Seok Kim, H. Kim, W. Song, J. Park, H. Cho, K. Lee","doi":"10.5145/KJCM.2010.13.3.109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"id antigen test and rRT-PCR. A total of 124 (10.1%) patients showed a discrepancy between the two tests. Among them, 116 (9.4%) were only positive for rRT-PCR and 8 (0.7%) were only positive for the rapid antigen test. The latter 8 patients all showed negative H1/M2 results in rRT-PCR. There were significant differences in detection rates of the rapid antigen test between different H1 Ct (threshold cycle) interval groups and for different age groups (P <0.05). Conclusion: Although the rapid antigen test is easy to perform and provides fast results, its limits as a screening test for detection of novel swine influenza (H1N1) due to its low sensitivity compared to rRTPCR need to be considered in practical situations. (Korean J Clin Microbiol 2010;13:109-113)","PeriodicalId":143093,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Clinical Microbiology","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Clinical Microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5145/KJCM.2010.13.3.109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

id antigen test and rRT-PCR. A total of 124 (10.1%) patients showed a discrepancy between the two tests. Among them, 116 (9.4%) were only positive for rRT-PCR and 8 (0.7%) were only positive for the rapid antigen test. The latter 8 patients all showed negative H1/M2 results in rRT-PCR. There were significant differences in detection rates of the rapid antigen test between different H1 Ct (threshold cycle) interval groups and for different age groups (P <0.05). Conclusion: Although the rapid antigen test is easy to perform and provides fast results, its limits as a screening test for detection of novel swine influenza (H1N1) due to its low sensitivity compared to rRTPCR need to be considered in practical situations. (Korean J Clin Microbiol 2010;13:109-113)
快速抗原检测与实时逆转录酶PCR诊断新型猪流感的比较
抗原检测和rRT-PCR。共有124例(10.1%)患者两种检测结果不一致。其中rRT-PCR仅阳性116例(9.4%),快速抗原检测仅阳性8例(0.7%)。后8例患者的rRT-PCR结果均为H1/M2阴性。不同H1 Ct(阈值周期)间隔组和不同年龄组间快速抗原试验检出率差异有统计学意义(P <0.05)。结论:快速抗原检测方法虽然操作简单,结果快速,但与rRTPCR相比,其灵敏度较低,作为新型猪流感(H1N1)的筛查试验存在局限性,需要在实际应用中加以考虑。(中华临床微生物学杂志2010;13:109-113)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信