Cargando…
Comparative diagnostic performance of rapid antigen detection tests for COVID-19 in a hospital setting
BACKGROUND: The availability of accurate and rapid diagnostic tools for COVID-19 is essential for tackling the ongoing pandemic. Our study aimed to quantify the performance of available antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) in a real-world hospital setting. METHODS: In this retrospectiv...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8078031/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33930540 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2021.04.072 |
_version_ | 1783684991468699648 |
---|---|
author | Bruzzone, Bianca De Pace, Vanessa Caligiuri, Patrizia Ricucci, Valentina Guarona, Giulia Pennati, Beatrice M. Boccotti, Simona Orsi, Andrea Domnich, Alexander Da Rin, Giorgio Icardi, Giancarlo |
author_facet | Bruzzone, Bianca De Pace, Vanessa Caligiuri, Patrizia Ricucci, Valentina Guarona, Giulia Pennati, Beatrice M. Boccotti, Simona Orsi, Andrea Domnich, Alexander Da Rin, Giorgio Icardi, Giancarlo |
author_sort | Bruzzone, Bianca |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The availability of accurate and rapid diagnostic tools for COVID-19 is essential for tackling the ongoing pandemic. Our study aimed to quantify the performance of available antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) in a real-world hospital setting. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, the diagnostic performance of 7 Ag-RDTs was compared with real-time reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay in terms of sensitivity, specificity and expected predictive values. RESULTS: A total of 321 matched Ag-RDTreal-time reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction samples were analyzed retrospectively. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the Ag-RDTs was 78.7% and 100%, respectively. However, a wide range of sensitivity estimates by brand (66.0%–93.8%) and cycle threshold (Ct) cut-off values (Ct <25: 96.2%; Ct 30–35: 31.1%) was observed. The optimal Ct cut-off value that maximized sensitivity was 29. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of Ag-RDTs may be convenient in moderate-to-high intensity settings when high volumes of specimens are tested every day. However, the diagnostic performance of the commercially available tests may differ substantially. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8078031 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80780312021-04-28 Comparative diagnostic performance of rapid antigen detection tests for COVID-19 in a hospital setting Bruzzone, Bianca De Pace, Vanessa Caligiuri, Patrizia Ricucci, Valentina Guarona, Giulia Pennati, Beatrice M. Boccotti, Simona Orsi, Andrea Domnich, Alexander Da Rin, Giorgio Icardi, Giancarlo Int J Infect Dis Article BACKGROUND: The availability of accurate and rapid diagnostic tools for COVID-19 is essential for tackling the ongoing pandemic. Our study aimed to quantify the performance of available antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) in a real-world hospital setting. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, the diagnostic performance of 7 Ag-RDTs was compared with real-time reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay in terms of sensitivity, specificity and expected predictive values. RESULTS: A total of 321 matched Ag-RDTreal-time reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction samples were analyzed retrospectively. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the Ag-RDTs was 78.7% and 100%, respectively. However, a wide range of sensitivity estimates by brand (66.0%–93.8%) and cycle threshold (Ct) cut-off values (Ct <25: 96.2%; Ct 30–35: 31.1%) was observed. The optimal Ct cut-off value that maximized sensitivity was 29. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of Ag-RDTs may be convenient in moderate-to-high intensity settings when high volumes of specimens are tested every day. However, the diagnostic performance of the commercially available tests may differ substantially. The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. 2021-06 2021-04-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8078031/ /pubmed/33930540 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2021.04.072 Text en © 2021 The Author(s) Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Article Bruzzone, Bianca De Pace, Vanessa Caligiuri, Patrizia Ricucci, Valentina Guarona, Giulia Pennati, Beatrice M. Boccotti, Simona Orsi, Andrea Domnich, Alexander Da Rin, Giorgio Icardi, Giancarlo Comparative diagnostic performance of rapid antigen detection tests for COVID-19 in a hospital setting |
title | Comparative diagnostic performance of rapid antigen detection tests for COVID-19 in a hospital setting |
title_full | Comparative diagnostic performance of rapid antigen detection tests for COVID-19 in a hospital setting |
title_fullStr | Comparative diagnostic performance of rapid antigen detection tests for COVID-19 in a hospital setting |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative diagnostic performance of rapid antigen detection tests for COVID-19 in a hospital setting |
title_short | Comparative diagnostic performance of rapid antigen detection tests for COVID-19 in a hospital setting |
title_sort | comparative diagnostic performance of rapid antigen detection tests for covid-19 in a hospital setting |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8078031/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33930540 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2021.04.072 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bruzzonebianca comparativediagnosticperformanceofrapidantigendetectiontestsforcovid19inahospitalsetting AT depacevanessa comparativediagnosticperformanceofrapidantigendetectiontestsforcovid19inahospitalsetting AT caligiuripatrizia comparativediagnosticperformanceofrapidantigendetectiontestsforcovid19inahospitalsetting AT ricuccivalentina comparativediagnosticperformanceofrapidantigendetectiontestsforcovid19inahospitalsetting AT guaronagiulia comparativediagnosticperformanceofrapidantigendetectiontestsforcovid19inahospitalsetting AT pennatibeatricem comparativediagnosticperformanceofrapidantigendetectiontestsforcovid19inahospitalsetting AT boccottisimona comparativediagnosticperformanceofrapidantigendetectiontestsforcovid19inahospitalsetting AT orsiandrea comparativediagnosticperformanceofrapidantigendetectiontestsforcovid19inahospitalsetting AT domnichalexander comparativediagnosticperformanceofrapidantigendetectiontestsforcovid19inahospitalsetting AT daringiorgio comparativediagnosticperformanceofrapidantigendetectiontestsforcovid19inahospitalsetting AT icardigiancarlo comparativediagnosticperformanceofrapidantigendetectiontestsforcovid19inahospitalsetting |