Cargando…
Clinitest rapid COVID-19 antigen test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection: A multicenter evaluation study
OBJECTIVES: RT-PCR assay is the reference method for diagnosis of COVID-19, but it is also a laborious and time-consuming technic, limiting the availability of testing. Rapid antigen-detection tests are faster and less expensive; however, the reliability of these tests must be validated before they...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier B.V.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8381653/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34461560 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2021.104961 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVES: RT-PCR assay is the reference method for diagnosis of COVID-19, but it is also a laborious and time-consuming technic, limiting the availability of testing. Rapid antigen-detection tests are faster and less expensive; however, the reliability of these tests must be validated before they can be used widely. The objective of this study was to determine the performance of the Clinitest Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test (ClinitestRT) (SIEMENS) for SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swab specimens. METHODS: This prospective multicenter study was carried out in three Spanish university hospitals including individuals with clinical symptoms or epidemiological criteria for COVID-19. Only individuals with ≤7 days from the onset of symptoms or from exposure to a confirmed case of COVID-19 were included. Two nasopharyngeal samples were taken to perform the ClinitestRT, as a point-of-care test, and a diagnostic RT-PCR test. RESULTS: Overall sensitivity and specificity for the ClinitestRT among the 450 patients studied were 93.3% (CI 95%: 89.7–96.8) and 99.2% (CI 95%: 97.2–99.8), respectively. Sensitivity in participants with ≤5 days of the clinical course was 93.6% (CI 95%: 89.2–96.3), and in participants who had a C(T) < 25 for the RT-PCR test was 98.4% (CI 95%: 94.5–99.6). Agreement between techniques was 96.7% (kappa score: 0.93; CI 95%: 0.90–0.97). CONCLUSIONS: The ClinitestRT provides good clinical performance, with more reliable results for patients with a higher viral load. The results must be interpreted based on the local epidemiological context. |
---|