Cargando…
Performance evaluation of the Panther Fusion® respiratory tract panel
BACKGROUND: Respiratory tract infections are among the most common infections during winter season. Rapid diagnostics is required for clinical decision making regarding isolation of patients and appropriate therapy. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical and clinical perfor...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7172494/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31869661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2019.104232 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Respiratory tract infections are among the most common infections during winter season. Rapid diagnostics is required for clinical decision making regarding isolation of patients and appropriate therapy. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical and clinical performance characteristics of the Panther Fusion® respiratory panel using published laboratory-developed real-time PCR assays (LDT). STUDY DESIGN: Analytical sensitivity of Panther Fusion® Flu A/B/RSV was assessed by testing dilutions of cell culture isolates. Clinical performance assessment included the complete Panther Fusion® respiratory panel (Flu-A/B/RSV, PIV 1-4 and AdV/hMPV/RV) and consisted of a retrospective and a prospective study-arm. The retrospective evaluation included 201, stored (−80 °C) samples collected between February 2006 and January 2017. Prospective evaluation was performed on 1045 unselected pretreated respiratory tract samples from patients presented to our hospital between November 2017 and May 2018. RESULTS: Analytical sensitivity was generally slightly lower for the Panther Fusion® assays. Clinical specificity and sensitivity was between 96 %–100 % and 71.9 %–100 %, respectively. Discrepant results were found in 146 samples of which 88 samples tested LDT positive / Panther Fusion® negative and 58 samples were LDT negative / Panther Fusion® positive. A total of ten discrepant samples with Ct-values <30 were sequenced to confirm the presence of 7 RV-C not-detected by LDT and 1 RV-A and 2 ADV-2 not detected by Panther Fusion®. CONCLUSIONS: The Panther Fusion® provides a random-access system with continuous loading and much shorter sample-to-answer times compared to LDT, albeit with a slightly less clinical sensitivity compared to the LDT. |
---|