Cargando…

Comparison of reverse-transcription qPCR and droplet digital PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical specimens of hospitalized patients

Accurate detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is not only necessary for viral load monitoring to optimize treatment in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients, but also critical for deciding whether the patient could be discharged without any risk of viral shedding. Di...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Jingyuan, Lin, Weishi, Du, Pibo, Liu, Wei, Liu, Xiong, Yang, Chaojie, Jia, Ruizhong, Wang, Yong, Chen, Yong, Jia, Leili, Han, Li, Tan, Weilong, Liu, Nan, Du, Junjie, Ke, Yuehua, Wang, Changjun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8933867/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35417835
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2022.115677
_version_ 1784671749309202432
author Li, Jingyuan
Lin, Weishi
Du, Pibo
Liu, Wei
Liu, Xiong
Yang, Chaojie
Jia, Ruizhong
Wang, Yong
Chen, Yong
Jia, Leili
Han, Li
Tan, Weilong
Liu, Nan
Du, Junjie
Ke, Yuehua
Wang, Changjun
author_facet Li, Jingyuan
Lin, Weishi
Du, Pibo
Liu, Wei
Liu, Xiong
Yang, Chaojie
Jia, Ruizhong
Wang, Yong
Chen, Yong
Jia, Leili
Han, Li
Tan, Weilong
Liu, Nan
Du, Junjie
Ke, Yuehua
Wang, Changjun
author_sort Li, Jingyuan
collection PubMed
description Accurate detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is not only necessary for viral load monitoring to optimize treatment in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients, but also critical for deciding whether the patient could be discharged without any risk of viral shedding. Digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) is more sensitive than reverse transcription quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) and is usually considered the superior choice. In the current study, we compared the clinical performance of RT-qPCR and ddPCR using oropharyngeal swab samples from patients hospitalized in the temporary Huoshenshan Hospital, Wuhan, Hubei, China. Results demonstrated that ddPCR was indeed more sensitive than RT-qPCR. Negative results might be caused by poor sampling technique or recovered patients, as the range of viral load in these patients varied significantly. In addition, both methods were highly correlated in terms of their ability to detect all three target genes as well as the ratio of copies of viral genes to that of the IC gene. Furthermore, our results evidenced that both methods detected the N gene more easily than the ORF gene. Taken together, these findings imply that the use of ddPCR, as an alternative to RT-qPCR, is necessary for the accurate diagnosis of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8933867
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Elsevier Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89338672022-03-21 Comparison of reverse-transcription qPCR and droplet digital PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical specimens of hospitalized patients Li, Jingyuan Lin, Weishi Du, Pibo Liu, Wei Liu, Xiong Yang, Chaojie Jia, Ruizhong Wang, Yong Chen, Yong Jia, Leili Han, Li Tan, Weilong Liu, Nan Du, Junjie Ke, Yuehua Wang, Changjun Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis Article Accurate detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is not only necessary for viral load monitoring to optimize treatment in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients, but also critical for deciding whether the patient could be discharged without any risk of viral shedding. Digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) is more sensitive than reverse transcription quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) and is usually considered the superior choice. In the current study, we compared the clinical performance of RT-qPCR and ddPCR using oropharyngeal swab samples from patients hospitalized in the temporary Huoshenshan Hospital, Wuhan, Hubei, China. Results demonstrated that ddPCR was indeed more sensitive than RT-qPCR. Negative results might be caused by poor sampling technique or recovered patients, as the range of viral load in these patients varied significantly. In addition, both methods were highly correlated in terms of their ability to detect all three target genes as well as the ratio of copies of viral genes to that of the IC gene. Furthermore, our results evidenced that both methods detected the N gene more easily than the ORF gene. Taken together, these findings imply that the use of ddPCR, as an alternative to RT-qPCR, is necessary for the accurate diagnosis of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients. Elsevier Inc. 2022-06 2022-03-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8933867/ /pubmed/35417835 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2022.115677 Text en © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 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
Li, Jingyuan
Lin, Weishi
Du, Pibo
Liu, Wei
Liu, Xiong
Yang, Chaojie
Jia, Ruizhong
Wang, Yong
Chen, Yong
Jia, Leili
Han, Li
Tan, Weilong
Liu, Nan
Du, Junjie
Ke, Yuehua
Wang, Changjun
Comparison of reverse-transcription qPCR and droplet digital PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical specimens of hospitalized patients
title Comparison of reverse-transcription qPCR and droplet digital PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical specimens of hospitalized patients
title_full Comparison of reverse-transcription qPCR and droplet digital PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical specimens of hospitalized patients
title_fullStr Comparison of reverse-transcription qPCR and droplet digital PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical specimens of hospitalized patients
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of reverse-transcription qPCR and droplet digital PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical specimens of hospitalized patients
title_short Comparison of reverse-transcription qPCR and droplet digital PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical specimens of hospitalized patients
title_sort comparison of reverse-transcription qpcr and droplet digital pcr for the detection of sars-cov-2 in clinical specimens of hospitalized patients
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8933867/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35417835
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2022.115677
work_keys_str_mv AT lijingyuan comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT linweishi comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT dupibo comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT liuwei comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT liuxiong comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT yangchaojie comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT jiaruizhong comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT wangyong comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT chenyong comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT jialeili comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT hanli comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT tanweilong comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT liunan comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT dujunjie comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT keyuehua comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients
AT wangchangjun comparisonofreversetranscriptionqpcranddropletdigitalpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2inclinicalspecimensofhospitalizedpatients