Evaluation of diagnostic utility and performance of rapid SARS-CoV- 2 antigen detection assay in comparison with Real-Time RT-PCR in Kolkata, India

A. Saha, S. Ghosh, S. Sen, T. Sur
{"title":"Evaluation of diagnostic utility and performance of rapid SARS-CoV- 2 antigen detection assay in comparison with Real-Time RT-PCR in Kolkata, India","authors":"A. Saha, S. Ghosh, S. Sen, T. Sur","doi":"10.4314/rejhs.v10i3.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: COVID-19 has so far affected millions of people in India. The present study was undertaken to find out the performance and reliability of rapid antigen test (RAT) in compared to reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).Methods: The pre and existing medical conditions and clinical signs and symptoms were noted. The nasopharyngeal swab samples were taken for RAT, while both nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab samples were mixed in a sterile viral transported medium (VTM) for RT-PCR. All patients were examined by RAT, while symptomatic negative in RAT were re-examined by RT-PCR.Results: Total 18,965 samples were examined by RAT and 3,998 samples by RT-PCR. Among them, only 5,753 patients (30.3%) were symptomatic and 1,757 patients (9.2%) were symptomatic positive. RAT showed overall 15.2% positive cases. Only 3.7% samples exhibited false negative results in RAT, which were found positive in RT-PCR. Interestingly, Ct (cycle threshold) values were >30 in all these samples.Conclusion: Hence, specific antigen-based rapid diagnostic test (RDT) will be most useful and reliable among any other qualitative tests for screening purpose.","PeriodicalId":29646,"journal":{"name":"Research Journal of Health Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Journal of Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/rejhs.v10i3.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: COVID-19 has so far affected millions of people in India. The present study was undertaken to find out the performance and reliability of rapid antigen test (RAT) in compared to reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).Methods: The pre and existing medical conditions and clinical signs and symptoms were noted. The nasopharyngeal swab samples were taken for RAT, while both nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab samples were mixed in a sterile viral transported medium (VTM) for RT-PCR. All patients were examined by RAT, while symptomatic negative in RAT were re-examined by RT-PCR.Results: Total 18,965 samples were examined by RAT and 3,998 samples by RT-PCR. Among them, only 5,753 patients (30.3%) were symptomatic and 1,757 patients (9.2%) were symptomatic positive. RAT showed overall 15.2% positive cases. Only 3.7% samples exhibited false negative results in RAT, which were found positive in RT-PCR. Interestingly, Ct (cycle threshold) values were >30 in all these samples.Conclusion: Hence, specific antigen-based rapid diagnostic test (RDT) will be most useful and reliable among any other qualitative tests for screening purpose.
印度加尔各答地区SARS-CoV- 2抗原快速检测方法与实时RT-PCR诊断效果的比较
背景:到目前为止,新冠肺炎已经影响了印度数百万人。本研究旨在了解快速抗原检测(RAT)与逆转录聚合酶链式反应(RT-PCR)相比的性能和可靠性。采集鼻咽拭子样本用于RAT,同时将鼻咽和口咽拭子样本混合在无菌病毒转运培养基(VTM)中用于RT-PCR。所有患者均接受RAT检查,而RAT中症状阴性的患者则接受RT-PCR重新检查。结果:共有18965份样本接受RAT检测,3998份样本接受RT-PCR检测。其中,只有5753名患者(30.3%)出现症状,1757名患者(9.2%)出现症状阳性。RAT总阳性率为15.2%。只有3.7%的样本在RAT中显示假阴性结果,在RT-PCR中发现假阴性结果。有趣的是,在所有这些样本中,Ct(循环阈值)值均>30。结论:因此,基于特异性抗原的快速诊断试验(RDT)将是其他任何定性试验中最有用和可靠的筛查方法。
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
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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