检测 COVID-19 的酶联免疫吸附试验和实时 PCR 试验的比较评估

Saye Moshashei, Haniyeh Bashi Zadeh Fakhar, Babak Shaghaghi, Melika Jalalian
{"title":"检测 COVID-19 的酶联免疫吸附试验和实时 PCR 试验的比较评估","authors":"Saye Moshashei, Haniyeh Bashi Zadeh Fakhar, Babak Shaghaghi, Melika Jalalian","doi":"10.18502/jmb.v12i1.15019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Considering the wide spread of covid-19 and its high death rate, it is very important to find a sensitive and accurate diagnostic method. Thus, this study compared two main diagnostic approaches; PCR and ELISA, to detect COVID-19. \nMethods: Fifty patients admitted to Baghiyatalah Hospital were examined to detect COVID-19 RNA by Real-time PCR method, as well as for the presence of IgG and IgM antibodies by ELISA method. The results were statistically analysed by SPSS software. \nResults: The mean age of patients is 38.4 years old. The percentage of positive cases of COVID-19 in the studied patients according to PCR and ELISA tests was 66% and 70%, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between positive cases of COVID-19 detected by PCR and ELISA with emerging fever, weakness, and lethargy . The diagnostic value of ELISA versus PCR showed that the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and true positive rate were 100%, 88.2%, 8.5, and 94.29%, respectively. \nConclusion: Although the sensitivity of detection in Real-time PCR is higher than that in ELISA, there is a high agreement between the two methods when used for diagnosis of COVID-19.","PeriodicalId":30437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Bacteriology","volume":"20 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Evaluation of ELISA and Real-time PCR Tests to Detect COVID-19\",\"authors\":\"Saye Moshashei, Haniyeh Bashi Zadeh Fakhar, Babak Shaghaghi, Melika Jalalian\",\"doi\":\"10.18502/jmb.v12i1.15019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Considering the wide spread of covid-19 and its high death rate, it is very important to find a sensitive and accurate diagnostic method. Thus, this study compared two main diagnostic approaches; PCR and ELISA, to detect COVID-19. \\nMethods: Fifty patients admitted to Baghiyatalah Hospital were examined to detect COVID-19 RNA by Real-time PCR method, as well as for the presence of IgG and IgM antibodies by ELISA method. The results were statistically analysed by SPSS software. \\nResults: The mean age of patients is 38.4 years old. The percentage of positive cases of COVID-19 in the studied patients according to PCR and ELISA tests was 66% and 70%, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between positive cases of COVID-19 detected by PCR and ELISA with emerging fever, weakness, and lethargy . The diagnostic value of ELISA versus PCR showed that the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and true positive rate were 100%, 88.2%, 8.5, and 94.29%, respectively. \\nConclusion: Although the sensitivity of detection in Real-time PCR is higher than that in ELISA, there is a high agreement between the two methods when used for diagnosis of COVID-19.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30437,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Bacteriology\",\"volume\":\"20 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Bacteriology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18502/jmb.v12i1.15019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Bacteriology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jmb.v12i1.15019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:考虑到 COVID-19 的广泛传播和高死亡率,找到一种敏感而准确的诊断方法非常重要。因此,本研究比较了检测 COVID-19 的两种主要诊断方法:PCR 和 ELISA。方法对巴吉雅塔拉医院收治的 50 名患者进行检查,采用实时 PCR 法检测 COVID-19 RNA,并采用 ELISA 法检测是否存在 IgG 和 IgM 抗体。结果通过 SPSS 软件进行统计分析。结果患者平均年龄为 38.4 岁。根据聚合酶链反应和酶联免疫吸附试验,研究对象中 COVID-19 阳性病例的比例分别为 66% 和 70%。PCR和ELISA检测出的COVID-19阳性病例与新出现的发热、虚弱和嗜睡之间存在明显的统计学差异。ELISA 与 PCR 的诊断价值显示,两者的灵敏度、特异性、阳性似然比和真阳性率分别为 100%、88.2%、8.5 和 94.29%。结论虽然实时 PCR 的检测灵敏度高于 ELISA,但这两种方法在用于诊断 COVID-19 时具有很高的一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Evaluation of ELISA and Real-time PCR Tests to Detect COVID-19
Background: Considering the wide spread of covid-19 and its high death rate, it is very important to find a sensitive and accurate diagnostic method. Thus, this study compared two main diagnostic approaches; PCR and ELISA, to detect COVID-19. Methods: Fifty patients admitted to Baghiyatalah Hospital were examined to detect COVID-19 RNA by Real-time PCR method, as well as for the presence of IgG and IgM antibodies by ELISA method. The results were statistically analysed by SPSS software. Results: The mean age of patients is 38.4 years old. The percentage of positive cases of COVID-19 in the studied patients according to PCR and ELISA tests was 66% and 70%, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between positive cases of COVID-19 detected by PCR and ELISA with emerging fever, weakness, and lethargy . The diagnostic value of ELISA versus PCR showed that the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and true positive rate were 100%, 88.2%, 8.5, and 94.29%, respectively. Conclusion: Although the sensitivity of detection in Real-time PCR is higher than that in ELISA, there is a high agreement between the two methods when used for diagnosis of COVID-19.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
11 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