Cargando…

Diagnostic Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test in a Large, German Cohort

We assessed the performance of a rapid antigen test (RAT) in everyday clinical practice. Between 1 November 2020 until 1 April 2021 all in-patients at the Helios University Hospital Wuppertal, Germany, as well as the accompanying relatives at the Children’s Hospital received a SARS-CoV-2 RAT and a S...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mboma, Olivier, Rieke, Elmar, Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz, Wirth, Stefan, Aydin, Malik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8394520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34438573
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children8080682
_version_ 1783743967295176704
author Mboma, Olivier
Rieke, Elmar
Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz
Wirth, Stefan
Aydin, Malik
author_facet Mboma, Olivier
Rieke, Elmar
Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz
Wirth, Stefan
Aydin, Malik
author_sort Mboma, Olivier
collection PubMed
description We assessed the performance of a rapid antigen test (RAT) in everyday clinical practice. Between 1 November 2020 until 1 April 2021 all in-patients at the Helios University Hospital Wuppertal, Germany, as well as the accompanying relatives at the Children’s Hospital received a SARS-CoV-2 RAT and a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR prior to admission. Out of 3686 patients, 22 (0.6%) subjects were tested positive by RT-PCR and RAT, and 3591 (97.4%) were negative by both methods, showing discordant results: RT-PCR+/RAT− in 58 (1.6%) and RT-PCR−/RAT+ in 15 patients (0.4%). Overall sensitivity and specificity of RAT was 27.5% (95%CI 18.1–38.6%) and 99.6% (95%CI 99.3–99.8%), respectively. The sensitivity was slightly higher in adults (30.4%, 95%CI 18.8–90.9%) than in pediatric subjects (20.8%, 95%CI 7.1–42.2%). False negative RAT had a statistically higher Ct-value (p < 0.001) compared to true positive values, and overall sensitivity increased to 80% [59.3–93.2%] with Ct value < 30. While the sensitivity of the RAT was poor compared with the RT-PCR, the specificity was excellent. However, the sensitivity increased with lower Ct value, and with the right anamnesis the RAT can be a quick and easy approach to distinguish people who are infectious with SARS-CoV-2 from noninfectious people, enabling appropriate triage in clinical practice while waiting for the RT-PCR result.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8394520
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83945202021-08-28 Diagnostic Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test in a Large, German Cohort Mboma, Olivier Rieke, Elmar Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz Wirth, Stefan Aydin, Malik Children (Basel) Article We assessed the performance of a rapid antigen test (RAT) in everyday clinical practice. Between 1 November 2020 until 1 April 2021 all in-patients at the Helios University Hospital Wuppertal, Germany, as well as the accompanying relatives at the Children’s Hospital received a SARS-CoV-2 RAT and a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR prior to admission. Out of 3686 patients, 22 (0.6%) subjects were tested positive by RT-PCR and RAT, and 3591 (97.4%) were negative by both methods, showing discordant results: RT-PCR+/RAT− in 58 (1.6%) and RT-PCR−/RAT+ in 15 patients (0.4%). Overall sensitivity and specificity of RAT was 27.5% (95%CI 18.1–38.6%) and 99.6% (95%CI 99.3–99.8%), respectively. The sensitivity was slightly higher in adults (30.4%, 95%CI 18.8–90.9%) than in pediatric subjects (20.8%, 95%CI 7.1–42.2%). False negative RAT had a statistically higher Ct-value (p < 0.001) compared to true positive values, and overall sensitivity increased to 80% [59.3–93.2%] with Ct value < 30. While the sensitivity of the RAT was poor compared with the RT-PCR, the specificity was excellent. However, the sensitivity increased with lower Ct value, and with the right anamnesis the RAT can be a quick and easy approach to distinguish people who are infectious with SARS-CoV-2 from noninfectious people, enabling appropriate triage in clinical practice while waiting for the RT-PCR result. MDPI 2021-08-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8394520/ /pubmed/34438573 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children8080682 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Mboma, Olivier
Rieke, Elmar
Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz
Wirth, Stefan
Aydin, Malik
Diagnostic Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test in a Large, German Cohort
title Diagnostic Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test in a Large, German Cohort
title_full Diagnostic Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test in a Large, German Cohort
title_fullStr Diagnostic Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test in a Large, German Cohort
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test in a Large, German Cohort
title_short Diagnostic Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test in a Large, German Cohort
title_sort diagnostic performance of sars-cov-2 rapid antigen test in a large, german cohort
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8394520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34438573
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children8080682
work_keys_str_mv AT mbomaolivier diagnosticperformanceofsarscov2rapidantigentestinalargegermancohort
AT riekeelmar diagnosticperformanceofsarscov2rapidantigentestinalargegermancohort
AT ahmadnejadparviz diagnosticperformanceofsarscov2rapidantigentestinalargegermancohort
AT wirthstefan diagnosticperformanceofsarscov2rapidantigentestinalargegermancohort
AT aydinmalik diagnosticperformanceofsarscov2rapidantigentestinalargegermancohort