A. Susanto, H. Agustin, M. Taufik, M. Rahman, Moulid Hidayat
{"title":"呼气中挥发性有机化合物(VOC)检测与逆转录酶聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)诊断COVID-19的准确性比较:一项基于证据的病例报告","authors":"A. Susanto, H. Agustin, M. Taufik, M. Rahman, Moulid Hidayat","doi":"10.5812/archcid-119263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a contagious infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The World Health Organization (WHO) declared this infection a global pandemic in 2020. In addition, various methods have been developed to diagnose COVID-19 rapidly and accurately to reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as a gold standard method. One of these methods is the detection of volatile organic compounds (VOC) in exhaled breath. Objectives: The aim was to collect and investigate studies on the accuracy of VOC detection as a diagnostic method for COVID-19. Methods: A literature search was performed in five electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, EBSCOhost, and Scopus, along with hand searching. The search was conducted in the titles and abstracts of articles using keywords and their equivalent terms, combined with the Boolean operators (OR and AND). The search results were then selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and compatibility with the Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) framework. Results: Based on the search results, two cross-sectional studies by Wintjens et al. and Ruszkiewicz et al. were selected, which were then critically appraised. Both studies showed good validity. Wintjens et al. reported 86% sensitivity and 54% specificity for their method, with a positive predictive value (PPV) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 40% and 92%, respectively. Besides, Ruszkiewicz et al., who conducted a study in two different locations, reported 82.4% sensitivity and 75% specificity for their method in Edinburgh (UK), with PPV and NPV of 87.5% and 66.7%, respectively, while they reported 90% sensitivity and 80% specificity in Dortmund (Germany), with PPV and NPV of 45% and 97.8%, respectively. The accuracy of these three methods was 62%, 80%, and 82%, respectively. Conclusions: Detection of VOCs from exhaled breath can be a rapid, cost-effective, and simple method for diagnosing COVID-19. However, the accuracy of this method is still relatively low (62 - 82%) and inconsistent; therefore, it is only recommended for screening.","PeriodicalId":51793,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Detection in Exhaled Breath Compared to Reverse-transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) for Diagnosis of COVID-19: An Evidence-based Case Report\",\"authors\":\"A. Susanto, H. Agustin, M. Taufik, M. Rahman, Moulid Hidayat\",\"doi\":\"10.5812/archcid-119263\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a contagious infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The World Health Organization (WHO) declared this infection a global pandemic in 2020. In addition, various methods have been developed to diagnose COVID-19 rapidly and accurately to reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as a gold standard method. One of these methods is the detection of volatile organic compounds (VOC) in exhaled breath. Objectives: The aim was to collect and investigate studies on the accuracy of VOC detection as a diagnostic method for COVID-19. Methods: A literature search was performed in five electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, EBSCOhost, and Scopus, along with hand searching. The search was conducted in the titles and abstracts of articles using keywords and their equivalent terms, combined with the Boolean operators (OR and AND). The search results were then selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and compatibility with the Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) framework. Results: Based on the search results, two cross-sectional studies by Wintjens et al. and Ruszkiewicz et al. were selected, which were then critically appraised. Both studies showed good validity. Wintjens et al. reported 86% sensitivity and 54% specificity for their method, with a positive predictive value (PPV) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 40% and 92%, respectively. Besides, Ruszkiewicz et al., who conducted a study in two different locations, reported 82.4% sensitivity and 75% specificity for their method in Edinburgh (UK), with PPV and NPV of 87.5% and 66.7%, respectively, while they reported 90% sensitivity and 80% specificity in Dortmund (Germany), with PPV and NPV of 45% and 97.8%, respectively. The accuracy of these three methods was 62%, 80%, and 82%, respectively. Conclusions: Detection of VOCs from exhaled breath can be a rapid, cost-effective, and simple method for diagnosing COVID-19. However, the accuracy of this method is still relatively low (62 - 82%) and inconsistent; therefore, it is only recommended for screening.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51793,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5812/archcid-119263\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/archcid-119263","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Accuracy of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Detection in Exhaled Breath Compared to Reverse-transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) for Diagnosis of COVID-19: An Evidence-based Case Report
Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a contagious infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The World Health Organization (WHO) declared this infection a global pandemic in 2020. In addition, various methods have been developed to diagnose COVID-19 rapidly and accurately to reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as a gold standard method. One of these methods is the detection of volatile organic compounds (VOC) in exhaled breath. Objectives: The aim was to collect and investigate studies on the accuracy of VOC detection as a diagnostic method for COVID-19. Methods: A literature search was performed in five electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, EBSCOhost, and Scopus, along with hand searching. The search was conducted in the titles and abstracts of articles using keywords and their equivalent terms, combined with the Boolean operators (OR and AND). The search results were then selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and compatibility with the Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) framework. Results: Based on the search results, two cross-sectional studies by Wintjens et al. and Ruszkiewicz et al. were selected, which were then critically appraised. Both studies showed good validity. Wintjens et al. reported 86% sensitivity and 54% specificity for their method, with a positive predictive value (PPV) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 40% and 92%, respectively. Besides, Ruszkiewicz et al., who conducted a study in two different locations, reported 82.4% sensitivity and 75% specificity for their method in Edinburgh (UK), with PPV and NPV of 87.5% and 66.7%, respectively, while they reported 90% sensitivity and 80% specificity in Dortmund (Germany), with PPV and NPV of 45% and 97.8%, respectively. The accuracy of these three methods was 62%, 80%, and 82%, respectively. Conclusions: Detection of VOCs from exhaled breath can be a rapid, cost-effective, and simple method for diagnosing COVID-19. However, the accuracy of this method is still relatively low (62 - 82%) and inconsistent; therefore, it is only recommended for screening.
期刊介绍:
Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases is a peer-reviewed multi-disciplinary medical publication, scheduled to appear quarterly serving as a means for scientific information exchange in the international medical forum. The journal particularly welcomes contributions relevant to the Middle-East region and publishes biomedical experiences and clinical investigations on prevalent infectious diseases in the region as well as analysis of factors that may modulate the incidence, course, and management of infectious diseases and pertinent medical problems in the Middle East.