scholarly journals Is the Portable Chest Radiographic More Reliable to Reveal Covid19 in Highly Suspicion Patient before Real-Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) Test?

Author(s):  
Bushra A. A. Albazi ◽  
Dr Noof. Albaz ◽  
Dr Nayef. Alqahtani ◽  
Dr. Angham Salih ◽  
Dr Rafat Mohtasab

A large number of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) present at hospitals. There are a limited number of isolation rooms open, and patients must often wait a long time to get a reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test done. This necessitates the introduction of effective triage plans. A patient with suspicions is referred to an emergency room (ED) depending on their medical record for a simple physical assessment, blood test findings, and chest imaging.A retrospective study design was conduct at Prince Sultan Medical Military City (PSMMC). Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional board to wave the consent forms since it is a retrospective study. Only the primary investigator has had the data access to the patients’ medical records. The collected patient records were under specific categories, including symptoms score starts from 5 and above, RT-PCR test result done after CXRP imaging, the patient admitted to the emergency department (ED). Excluding all CXRP done after RT-PCR TEST, positive Covid 19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), pediatric patients, and patients with score symptoms were less than five. Two experienced radiologists reviewed the images blindly, and the inter-observer reliability of observations noted by the radiologists was calculated. As for the relationship between the x-ray reading and the RT-PCR test result, our results showed a high correlation between the variables (chi-square χ² = 12.44, with df =1, and p<0.001). The sensitivity of x-ray diagnosing covid19 was 65.52 %, while the specificity was 54.51 %, and the accuracy of radiologists reading was 58.17 %. Furthermore, the positive predictive value (PPV) was 41.76 %, and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 76.05%. Finally, the false positive rate (type-i error (alpha) was 45.49%, and the false-negative rate (type-ii error (beta) was 34.48% Our research findings show that CXRP imaging can detect COVID-19 infection in symptomatic patients and can be a valuable addition to RT-PCR testing. In an inpatient ED environment where availability of test kits, laboratory equipment, and laboratory personnel is compromised and risks delaying patient treatment and hospital workflow, serial CXRP could theoretically be used as an adjunct diagnostic function and monitoring in patients suspected of having COVID-19.

2021 ◽  
pp. 003022282110598
Author(s):  
Hümeyra Aslaner ◽  
Betül Özen ◽  
Zeliha K. Erten ◽  
Mebrure Beyza Gökçek

Urgent measures were taken for those at the age of 65 and over who were at the risk group all over the world due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It is known that many individuals at the age of 65 and over have experienced anxiety due to the uncertainties. This study aimed to determine the anxiety and death anxiety in individuals aged 65 and over who were isolation at home due to being diagnosed with COVID-19 or being in contact during the pandemic process. The study is descriptive and cross-sectional. It was performed with 656 home-quarantined individuals aged between 65–80 years with positive or negative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test result. A form including questions about the death anxiety and the Coronavirus Anxiety Scale Short Form prepared by the researchers were administered to the individuals by phone call. Of the participants, 49.5% were male. Median COVID-19 anxiety score was 4 (0–18). Anxiety scores of the male and female participants were similar. Participants with negative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results and those with death anxiety had higher COVID anxiety scores. Death anxiety has increased by 1.661 times in male gender, 1.983 times in RT-PCR positivity and 0.146 times in the presence of symptoms. Individuals with positive COVID-19 test results or those aged 65 and over who had death anxiety and negative COVID-19 test result but who were in home-isolation due to being a contact had higher anxiety score. For this reason, those with death anxiety can be supported in line with their religious beliefs to reduce anxiety. Those with negative PCR test results in quarantine can be adequately informed about the COVID-19.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatemeh Khatami ◽  
Mohammad Saatchi ◽  
Seyed Saeed Tamehri Zadeh ◽  
Zahra Sadat Aghamir ◽  
Alireza Namazi Shabestari ◽  
...  

AbstractNowadays there is an ongoing acute respiratory outbreak caused by the novel highly contagious coronavirus (COVID-19). The diagnostic protocol is based on quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and chests CT scan, with uncertain accuracy. This meta-analysis study determines the diagnostic value of an initial chest CT scan in patients with COVID-19 infection in comparison with RT-PCR. Three main databases; PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and EMBASE were systematically searched for all published literature from January 1st, 2019, to the 21st May 2020 with the keywords "COVID19 virus", "2019 novel coronavirus", "Wuhan coronavirus", "2019-nCoV", "X-Ray Computed Tomography", "Polymerase Chain Reaction", "Reverse Transcriptase PCR", and "PCR Reverse Transcriptase". All relevant case-series, cross-sectional, and cohort studies were selected. Data extraction and analysis were performed using STATA v.14.0SE (College Station, TX, USA) and RevMan 5. Among 1022 articles, 60 studies were eligible for totalizing 5744 patients. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of chest CT scan compared to RT-PCR were 87% (95% CI 85–90%), 46% (95% CI 29–63%), 69% (95% CI 56–72%), and 89% (95% CI 82–96%), respectively. It is important to rely on the repeated RT-PCR three times to give 99% accuracy, especially in negative samples. Regarding the overall diagnostic sensitivity of 87% for chest CT, the RT-PCR testing is essential and should be repeated to escape misdiagnosis.


Author(s):  
Gaël Grandmaison ◽  
Marine Baumberger ◽  
Charlotte Pellaud ◽  
Véronique Erard ◽  
Christian Chuard

Background: Various recommendations exist concerning the discontinuation of contact and droplet precautions (CDP) for patients hospitalised with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Some are based on repeated negative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results, whereas other are based on clinical criteria. The feasibility and safety of these recommendations are poorly documented. Method: We conducted a retrospective study to assess the feasibility and safety of a symptom-based strategy to discontinue CDP for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. We reviewed the clinical charts of all symptomatic patients hospitalised in our institution with RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 to assess the application of a symptom-based strategy for the implementation and discontinuation of CDP. The patients with discontinuation of CDP in accordance with the symptom-based strategy were cross-referenced with patients with potential hospital-acquired COVID-19 in order to assess the safety of this strategy. Results: Among the 147 patients included in our study, our symptom-based strategy was respected in 95 cases (64.6%). Discontinuation of CDP in accordance with the recommendations occurred in 39 patients (26.5%). After the discontinuation of CDP, patients remained hospitalised for a median time of 18 days, with exposure to a median number of three patients, resulting in a total number of 588 days ‘patient-day-exposition’. No hospital-acquired COVID-19 was detected in contact patients. Discussion: The use of a symptom-based strategy to discontinue CDP is applicable and safe. This symptom-based strategy was applicable regardless of patient’s age or COVID-19 severity.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Blessen George ◽  
James McGee ◽  
Eileen Giangrasso ◽  
Sheila Finkelstein ◽  
Susan Wu ◽  
...  

Abstract Utilizing results of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing and subsequent antibody titers, we report on the test characteristics of a PCR screening test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 among hospital workers. The PCR test was found to be 87% sensitive and 97% specific, with a positive predictive value of 0.98 and a negative predictive value of 0.80.


2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 767-773 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Palmieri ◽  
Paolo A. Ascierto ◽  
Francesco Perrone ◽  
Sabrina M.R. Satriano ◽  
Alessandro Ottaiano ◽  
...  

Purpose: Factors that are predictive of prognosis in patients who are diagnosed with malignant melanoma (MM) are widely awaited. Detection of circulating melanoma cells (CMCs) by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) has recently been postulated as a possible negative prognostic factor. Two main questions were addressed: first, whether the presence of CMCs, defined as the patient being positive for any of the three markers, had a prognostic role; and second, what the predictive value of each individual marker was. Patients and Methods: A consecutive series of 200 melanoma patients observed between January 1997 and December 1997, with stage of disease ranging from I to IV, was analyzed by semiquantitative RT-PCR. Tyrosinase, p97, and MelanA/MART1 were used as markers to CMCs on baseline peripheral blood samples. Progression-free survival (PFS) was used as a unique end point and was described by the product limit method. Multivariable analysis was applied to verify whether the auspicated prognostic value of these markers was independent of the stage of disease, and a subgroup analysis was performed that excluded patients with stage IV disease. Results: Overall, 32% (64 of 200) of patients progressed, and a median PFS of 52 months in the whole series was observed. The presence of CMCs and the markers individually or combined was predictive of prognosis in the univariate analysis but did not provide additional prognostic information to the stage of disease in multivariable models. In the subgroup analysis of stage (ie, I–III subgroup), similar results were observed. Conclusion: Detection of CMCs in peripheral blood samples at the time of MM diagnosis by semiquantitative RT-PCR does not add any significant predictive value to the stage of disease. Thus, this approach should not be used in clinical practice, and further studies are required to determine its usefulness.


2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (6) ◽  
pp. 688-693 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic Dizon ◽  
Marilyn Mitchell ◽  
Bernadette Dizon ◽  
Robert Libke ◽  
Michael W Peterson

AbstractCoccidioidomycosis, the fungal infection caused by dimorphic Coccidioides species, is typically diagnosed by histopathologic identification of spherules, by culture, or by serology. These tests are reliable but time-intensive, delaying diagnosis and treatment. Rapid real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) can be performed and was validated to identify Coccidioides immitis using an in-house developed assay for the Becton Dickinson molecular instrument (BD MAXTM). These studies were performed using patient samples that had been shown to be positive on previously set up fungal cultures. To evaluate this new RT-PCR test in the clinical setting, we conducted a retrospective chart review of patients (N = 1160) who underwent Coccidioides PCR (Cocci PCR) on clinical samples between March 1, 2014, and Dec 31, 2016. We abstracted clinical, microbiologic, serologic, radiographic, treatment, and follow-up data. Specimens of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), bronchioalveolar lavage fluid (BAL), lung tissue biopsy (LTB), sputum, and pleural fluid were evaluated to determine sensitivity and specificity. Of the 113 specimens that tested positive for Cocci PCR, all had clinical disease defined by traditional clinical criteria, yielding 100% specificity. Overall sensitivity was 74% versus 46% for fungal culture and was available in 4 hours rather than 1–2 weeks. Sensitivities varied by source material and clinical setting. CSF had a sensitivity of 59%, BAL for acute pneumonia 91%, sputum for acute pneumonia 94%, pleural fluid 86%, but LTB for lung nodules only 44%. Overall positive predictive value (PPV) was 100%, while negative predictive value (NPV) was 96%, but again this varied by specimen and clinical setting. Our experience with clinical testing of >1160 specimens over 2–3 years shows we can utilize this technology to improve our ability to diagnose disease but that the sensitivity varies by specimen source and clinical setting.


Author(s):  
Arghadip Samaddar ◽  
Ravisekhar Gadepalli ◽  
Vijaya Lakshmi Nag ◽  
Sanjeev Misra ◽  
Pankaj Bhardwaj ◽  
...  

Abstract We studied the pattern and duration of viral RNA shedding in 32 asymptomatic and 11 pauci-symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. Viral RNA shedding in exhaled breath progressively diminished and became negative after six days of a positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. Therefore, the duration of isolation can be minimised to six days.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-45
Author(s):  
Dinesh Kumar

Recently, an argument was put forth because a symptomatic and positive patient for CoVID-19 turned tested negative after 7 days, so discharged from the hospital. Both at the time of admission and discharge real-time reverse transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) was done for testing of CoVID-19. Immediately, patient again developed respiratory symptoms and was admitted to hospital again. Amidst of current CoVID-19 pandemic, a question was asked “What is the specificity of the Real Time-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) test for COVID-19?” with an assumption that what if at the time of discharge the disease is present in patient but test turned out to be negative? In response to that a counter statement was posed that “It is the sensitivity that should be asked rather than specificity”. It was based on the implication of primary question that was implying false negative report of the RT-PCR. It means, since patient was discharged with negative result that could be false negative.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 408-410
Author(s):  
Fatemeh Bahreini ◽  
Rezvan Najafi ◽  
Razieh Amini ◽  
Salman Khazaei ◽  
Saeid Bashirian

As the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic spreads rapidly, there is need for a diagnostic test with high accuracy to detect infected individuals especially those without symptoms. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is a common molecular test for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2. If some factors are not taken into consideration when performing this test, it can have a relatively large number of false negative results. In this article, we discuss important considerations that could lead to false negative test reduction. Key words: • SARS-CoV-2 • COVID-19 • Real time polymerase chain reaction • RT-PCR test • Diagnosis • False negatives • Genetics • Emerging disease   Copyright © 2020 Bahreini et al. Published by Global Health and Education Projects, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0)which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in this journal, is properly cited.


Author(s):  
Puspa Wardhani ◽  
Trieva Verawaty Butarbutar ◽  
Christophorus Oetama Adiatmaja ◽  
Amarensi Milka Betaubun ◽  
Nur Hamidah ◽  
...  

Background: The diagnostic test for malaria is mostly based on Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) and detection by microscopy. Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) is also a sensitive detection method that can be considered as a diagnostic tool. The outcome of malaria microscopy detection depends on the examiner's ability and experience. Some RDT has been distributed in Indonesia, which needs to be evaluated for their results. Objective: This study aimed to compare the performance of RightSign RDT and ScreenPlus RDT for detection of Plasmodium in human blood. We used specific real-time polymerase chain reaction abTESTMMalaria qPCRII) and gold standard of microscopy detection method to measure diagnostic efficiency. Methods: Blood specimens were evaluated using RightSign RDT, ScreenPlus RDT, Microscopy detection, and RT-PCR as the protocol described. The differences on specificity (Sp), sensitivity (Sn), positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were analyzed using McNemar and Kruskal Wallis analysis. Results: A total of 105 subjects were recruited. Based on microscopy test, RightSign RDT had sensitivity, Specificity, PPV, NPV, 100%, 98%, 98.2%, 100%, respectively. ScreenPlus showed 100% sensitivity, 98% specificity, 98.2% PPV, 100% NPV. The sensitivity of both RDTs became lower (75%) and the specificity higher (100 %) when using real-time PCR. Both RDTs showed a 100% agreement. RT-PCR detected higher mix infection when compared to microscopy and RDTs. Conclusion: RightSign and ScreenPlus RDT have excellent performance when using microscopy detection as a gold standard. Real-time PCR method can be considered as a confirmation tool for malaria diagnosis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document