scholarly journals Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction assay for the detection of COVID-19 from clinical samples in low-and middle-income countries: Protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Oladipo Babafemi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Pcr Assay ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Abstract Background: COVID-19 has spread globally since its discovery in Hubei province, China in December 2019 and became pandemic in 2020. COVID-19 is a new betacoronavirus and a variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARA- CoV-2). Rapid, accurate and reliable diagnosis of COVID-19 will prevent the spread and allow for appropriate management. The main objective of this systematic review is to identify, appraise and summarise the published evidence on the diagnostic performance and effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 virus in the diagnosis of current or previous COVID-19 using real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: We will search MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, BIOSIS, LILACS, Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialised Register (CIDG SR), Global Health, and CINAHL for published studies for the diagnosis of COVID-19 using real-time polymerase chain reaction assay in LMICs There will be no restriction regarding the language, date of publication, and publication status. We will include retrospective, cross-sectional and cohort observational studies will be included in the review. Selection of studies, data extraction and management, assessment of risk of bias, and quality of evidence will be performed by two independent reviewers (EB and BC). A third researcher (GM) will be consulted in case of discrepancies. Depending on the availability and quality of the data, a meta-analysis will be performed. Otherwise, findings will be qualitatively reported. Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the uptake of RT-PCR assay for SARS-CoV-2 detection from clinical samples in human in LMICs. This review will make available evidence on the uptake, accuracy, approach, and interpretation of results of this assay in the context of COVID-19 diagnosis which will meet an urgent need, considering the diagnostic challenges of RT-PCR assay for COVID-19 diagnosis in humans. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42021271894

scholarly journals Analysis and validation of a highly sensitive one-step nested quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for specific detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang Zhang ◽  
Chunyang Dai ◽  
Huiyan Wang ◽  
Yong Gao ◽  
Tuantuan Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Pcr Assay ◽  
Qrt Pcr ◽  
Highly Sensitive ◽  
One Step ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, is posing a serious threat to global public health. Reverse transcriptase real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) is widely used as the gold standard for clinical detection of SARS-CoV-2. Due to technical limitations, the reported positive rates of qRT-PCR assay of throat swab samples vary from 30 to 60%. Therefore, the evaluation of alternative strategies to overcome the limitations of qRT-PCR is required. A previous study reported that one-step nested (OSN)-qRT-PCR revealed better suitability for detecting SARS-CoV-2. However, information on the analytical performance of OSN-qRT-PCR is insufficient. Method In this study, we aimed to analyze OSN-qRT-PCR by comparing it with droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) and qRT-PCR by using a dilution series of SARS-CoV-2 pseudoviral RNA and a quality assessment panel. The clinical performance of OSN-qRT-PCR was also validated and compared with ddPCR and qRT-PCR using specimens from COVID-19 patients. Result The limit of detection (copies/ml) of qRT-PCR, ddPCR, and OSN-qRT-PCR were 520.1 (95% CI: 363.23–1145.69) for ORF1ab and 528.1 (95% CI: 347.7–1248.7) for N, 401.8 (95% CI: 284.8–938.3) for ORF1ab and 336.8 (95% CI: 244.6–792.5) for N, and 194.74 (95% CI: 139.7–430.9) for ORF1ab and 189.1 (95% CI: 130.9–433.9) for N, respectively. Of the 34 clinical samples from COVID-19 patients, the positive rates of OSN-qRT-PCR, ddPCR, and qRT-PCR were 82.35% (28/34), 67.65% (23/34), and 58.82% (20/34), respectively. Conclusion In conclusion, the highly sensitive and specific OSN-qRT-PCR assay is superior to ddPCR and qRT-PCR assays, showing great potential as a technique for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in patients with low viral loads.

scholarly journals Collaborative Trial for Validation of a Real-Time Reverse Transcriptase-Polymerase Chain Reaction Assay for Detection of Central Nervous System Tissues as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy RiskMaterial: Part 1

2006 ◽  
Vol 89 (5) ◽  
pp. 1335-1340
Author(s):  
Amir Abdulmawjood ◽  
Holger Schnenbrcher ◽  
Michael BÜlte
Keyword(s):  
Central Nervous System ◽  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Meat Products ◽  
Spongiform Encephalopathy ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Pcr Assay ◽  
Heat Treated ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Abstract A collaborative trial was conducted to evaluate a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay for detection of central nervous system (CNS) tissues in meat products (e.g., sausages). The method is based on the detection of ruminant glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) mRNA by applying real-time RT-PCR. The assay was evaluated through a multicenter trial involving 12 participating laboratories that received coded cDNA obtained from 3 different types of sausages. The participants used 5 different real-time detection systems. The results obtained in this validation revealed that this real-time RT-PCR assay performed well in the different laboratories with a detection limit of at least 0.1% CNS in those test materials that contained strongly heat-treated samples (sausages cooked at 120C) and the medium heat-treated samples (sausages cooked at 80C). The detection limit of liver sausages was determined to be 0.2% of CNS. Neither the samples with no CNS additive nor the bovine DNA and the negative control containing 100% swine brain gave any positive signals. The presented results indicate that the real-time RT-PCR assay was just as reproducible between laboratories, as repeatable within a laboratory, could reliably be used for detection of bovine spongiform encephalopathy risk material in meat and meat products, and signify that it may be used with confidence in any laboratory.

Increased detection of rotavirus using a real time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay in stool specimens from children with diarrhea

2004 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 496-501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoli L. Pang ◽  
Bonita Lee ◽  
Nasim Boroumand ◽  
Barbara Leblanc ◽  
Jutta K. Preiksaitis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Reverse Transcription ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Pcr Assay ◽  
Stool Specimens ◽  
Polymerase Chain

scholarly journals Evaluation of Amplification Targets for the Specific Detection ofBordetella pertussisUsing Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 217-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Rubayet Hasan ◽  
Rusung Tan ◽  
Ghada N Al-Rawahi ◽  
Eva Thomas ◽  
Peter Tilley
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Reference Panel ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Analytical Sensitivity ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Pcr Assay ◽  
Polymerase Chain

BACKGROUND:Bordetella pertussisinfections continue to be a major public health challenge in Canada. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays to detectB pertussisare typically based on the multicopy insertion sequence IS481, which offers high sensitivity but lacks species specificity.METHODS: A novelB pertussisreal-time PCR assay based on the porin gene was tested in parallel with several previously published assays that target genes such as IS481,ptx-promoter, pertactin and a putative thialase. The assays were evaluated using a reference panel of common respiratory bacteria including differentBordetellaspecies and 107 clinical nasopharyngeal specimens. Discrepant results were confirmed by sequencing the PCR products.RESULTS: Analytical sensitivity was highest for the assay targeting the IS481element; however, the assay lacked specificity forB pertussisin the reference panel and in the clinical samples. False-positive results were also observed with assays targeting theptx-promoter and pertactin genes. A PCR assay based on the thialase gene was highly specific but failed to detect all reference strains ofB pertussis. However, a novel assay targeting the porin gene demonstrated high specificity forB pertussisboth in the reference panel and in clinical samples and, based on sequence-confirmed results, correctly predicted allB pertussis-positive cases in clinical samples. According to Probit regression analysis, the 95% detection limit of the new assay was 4 colony forming units/reaction.CONCLUSION: A novel porin assay forB pertussisdemonstrated superior performance and may be useful for improved molecular detection ofB pertussisin clinical specimens.

Diagnostic yield of real-time polymerase chain reaction in the diagnosis of intrapartum maternal rectovaginal colonization by group B Streptococcus : a systematic review with meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 91 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Otto Henrique May Feuerschuette ◽  
Sheila Koettker Silveira ◽  
Ana Carolina Labor Cancelier ◽  
Rosemeri Maurici da Silva ◽  
Daisson José Trevisol ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Diagnostic Yield ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Group B Streptococcus ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Group B ◽  
Streptococcus A

scholarly journals Analysis and validation of a highly sensitive one-step nested quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for specific detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang Zhang ◽  
Chunyang Dai ◽  
Huiyan Wang ◽  
Yong Gao ◽  
Tuantuan Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Pcr Assay ◽  
Qrt Pcr ◽  
Highly Sensitive ◽  
One Step ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, is posing a serious threat to global public health. Reverse transcriptase real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) is widely used as the gold standard for clinical detection of SARS-CoV-2. Due to technical limitations, the reported positive rates of qRT-PCR assay of throat swab samples vary from 30–60%. Therefore, the evaluation of alternative strategies to overcome the limitations of qRT-PCR is required. A previous study reported that one-step nested (OSN)-qRT-PCR revealed better suitability for detecting SARS-CoV-2. However, information on the analytical performance of OSN-qRT-PCR is insufficient. Method: In this study, we aimed to analyze OSN-qRT-PCR by comparing it with droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) and qRT-PCR by using a dilution series of SARS-CoV-2 pseudoviral RNA and a quality assessment panel. The clinical performance of OSN-qRT-PCR was also validated and compared with ddPCR and qRT-PCR using specimens from COVID-19 patients. Result The LoD (copies/ml) of qRT-PCR, ddPCR, and OSN-qRT-PCR were 520.1 (95% CI): 363.23–1145.69) for ORF1ab and 528.1 (95% CI: 347.7–1248.7) for N, 401.8 (95% CI: 284.8–938.3) for ORF1ab and 336.8 (95% CI: 244.6–792.5) for N, and 194.74 (95% CI: 139.7–430.9) for ORF1ab and 189.1 (95% CI: 130.9–433.9) for N, respectively. Of the 34 clinical samples from COVID-19 patients, the positive rates of OSN-qRT-PCR, ddPCR, and qRT-PCR were 82.35% (28/34), 67.65% (23/34), and 58.82% (20/34), respectively. Conclusion In conclusion, the highly sensitive and specific OSN-qRT-PCR assay is superior to ddPCR and qRT-PCR assays, showing great potential as a technique for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in patients with low viral loads.

DETECTION OF RESPIRATORY SYNCITIAL VIRUS (RSV) IN LOWER ACUTE RESPIRATORY INFECTIONS BY NESTED REVERSE TRANSCRIPTION- POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION

2011 ◽  
pp. 11-15
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Reverse Transcription ◽  
Respiratory Infections ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Acute Respiratory Infections ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Minimal Level ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Pcr Assay ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Objective: To develop and apply a nested reverse transcription- polymerase chain reaction (nested RT-PCR) for detection of RSV in lower acute respiratory infections. Materials and methods: A nested reverse transcription- polymerase chain reaction was used to amplify a sequence of the F gene in the RSV genomic RNA, optimized and compared the sensitivity and specificity of this assay with the control samples and then applied this procedure for diagnosing RSV from clinical samples. Results: This nested RT-PCR assay amplified the specific target fragment of RSV RNA and did not amplify any sequence of genomes of the tested common viruses and bacteria causing respiratory infections. The minimal level of detection of this procedure was 102 copies/ml. Results for detection of RSV on 109 samples of throat swabs or nasopharyngeal swabs from children with lower respiratory infections showed that twenty seven patients were positive with RSV ( 24.8%), among which six out of 30 (20%) were with bronchitis, seven out of 26 ( 27%) were with bronchiolitis and fourteen out of 53 (26.4%) were with pneumonia. Conclusion: This nested RT-PCR was found to be useful and reliable for detection of RSV in respiratory infections.

scholarly journals Exploring the Clinical Utility of Gustatory Dysfunction (GD) as a Triage Symptom Prior to Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) in the Diagnosis of COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Life ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 1315
Author(s):  
Khang Wen Pang ◽  
Sher-Lyn Tham ◽  
Li Shia Ng
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Reverse Transcription ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Background: The diagnosis of COVID-19 is made using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) but its sensitivity varies from 20 to 100%. The presence of gustatory dysfunction (GD) in a patient with upper respiratory tract symptoms might increase the clinical suspicion of COVID-19. Aims: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR−) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of using GD as a triage symptom prior to RT-PCR. Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched up to 20 June 2021. Studies published in English were included if they compared the frequency of GD in COVID-19 adult patients (proven by RT-PCR) to COVID-19 negative controls in case control or cross-sectional studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Results: 21,272 COVID-19 patients and 52,298 COVID-19 negative patients were included across 44 studies from 21 countries. All studies were of moderate to high risk of bias. Patients with GD were more likely to test positive for COVID-19: DOR 6.39 (4.86–8.40), LR+ 3.84 (3.04–4.84), LR− 0.67 (0.64–0.70), pooled sensitivity 0.37 (0.29–0.47) and pooled specificity 0.92 (0.89–0.94). While history/questionnaire-based assessments were predictive of RT-PCR positivity (DOR 6.62 (4.95–8.85)), gustatory testing was not (DOR 3.53 (0.98–12.7)). There was significant heterogeneity among the 44 studies (I2 = 92%, p < 0.01). Conclusions: GD is useful as a symptom to determine if a patient should undergo further testing, especially in resource-poor regions where COVID-19 testing is scarce. Patients with GD may be advised to quarantine while repeated testing is performed if the initial RT-PCR is negative. Funding: None.

scholarly journals Chest CT versus RT-PCR for the Detection of COVID-19: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Karam ◽  
Sulaiman Althuwaikh ◽  
Mohammad Alazemi ◽  
Ahmad Abul ◽  
Amrit Hayre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Chest Computed Tomography ◽  
Polymerase Chain

AbstractPurposeTo compare the performance of chest computed tomography (CT) scan versus reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in the initial diagnostic assessment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A search of electronic information was conducted to identify all relevant studies comparing the diagnostic performance of chest CT scan versus RT-PCR in COVID-19 suspected cases. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were primary outcome measures. Secondary outcome measures included other test performance characteristics, discrepant findings between both investigations and main chest CT findings. Random effects modelling was used for the analyses.ResultsEight non-randomised retrospective studies enrolling 1910 patients were identified. Chest CT was more sensitive but less specific than RT-PCR. Accuracy was not statistically significantly different between chest CT and RT-PCR for the identification and exclusion of COVID-19 cases (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.40, P = 0.15) in the context of hospitalised patients in a pandemic. Chest CT was shown to detect patients with false-negative RT-PCR results and true positives. Ground-glass opacities and consolidations were the most common chest CT manifestations.ConclusionsChest CT is not superior to RT-PCR for the initial detection of COVID-19 and has more false positives. It is likely to be useful in confirming COVID-19 in patients with a suspicious clinical presentation, but who have a false-negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test.Key Points‐Chest computed tomography (CT) is more sensitive but less specific in detecting and excluding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) when compared to reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).‐Accuracy of chest CT is not significantly different from RT-PCR for COVID-19 cases.‐Chest CT can detect false-negative and true-positive RT-PCR cases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document