A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Performance evaluation of influenza a rapid antigen test and PCR among nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal samples. | LitMetric

Performance evaluation of influenza a rapid antigen test and PCR among nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal samples.

Pract Lab Med

Department of Clinical Laboratory, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Xiamen Branch, 668 Jinhu Road, 361015, Xiamen, China.

Published: May 2024

Objectives: Rapid antigen test (RAT) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using nasopharyngeal (NP) or oropharyngeal (OP) swab specimens are the two main testing techniques used for laboratory diagnosis of influenza in clinical practice. However, performance variations have been observed not only between techniques, but also between different specimens. This study evaluated the differences in performance between specimens and testing techniques to identify the best combination in clinical practice.

Methods: Both NP and OP samples from suspected influenza patients collected in the 2023/4-2023/5 Flu-season in Xiamen, China, were tested for RAT and quantitative PCR. The testing performance of the different specimens and testing techniques were recorded and evaluated.

Results: Compared to PCR, RAT showed 58.9 % and 10.3 % sensitivity for NP and OP swabs, respectively. The Limit of Detection (LoD) was 28.71 the Median Tissue Culture Infectious Dose (TCID)/mL. Compared with PCR using NP swabs, PCR with OP swabs showed 89.5 % sensitivity and 95.4 % specificity.

Conclusions: There were no significant differences in performance between the specimens when PCR was used to test for influenza. However, a decrease in sensitivity was observed when the RAT was used, regardless of the specimen type. Therefore, to avoid false-negative results, PCR may be a better choice when OP swabs are used as specimens. In contrast, NP swabs should be the recommended specimens for RAT.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11234145PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plabm.2024.e00416DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

testing techniques
12
performance specimens
12
rapid antigen
8
antigen test
8
pcr
8
pcr nasopharyngeal
8
nasopharyngeal oropharyngeal
8
differences performance
8
specimens testing
8
compared pcr
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!