SARS Coronavirus Detection Methods

Using clinical samples from patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome, we showed that the sensitivities of a quantitative reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (80% for fecal samples and 25% for urine samples) were higher than those of the polyclonal (50% and 5%) and monoclonal (35%...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lau, Susanna K.P., Che, Xiao-Yan, Woo, Patrick C.Y., Wong, Beatrice H.L., Cheng, Vincent C.C., Woo, Gibson K.S., Hung, Ivan F.N., Poon, Rosana W.S., Chan, Kwok-Hung, Peiris, J.S. Malik, Yuen, Kwok-Yung
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2005
Materias:
Dispatch
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3371792/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16022791
http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid1107.041045
Descripción
Sumario:Using clinical samples from patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome, we showed that the sensitivities of a quantitative reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (80% for fecal samples and 25% for urine samples) were higher than those of the polyclonal (50% and 5%) and monoclonal (35% and 8%) antibody-based nucleocapsid antigen capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays.

Ejemplares similares