Key result
RT-PSR achieves 100% agreement with qRT-PCR for rapid Coxsackievirus A16 detection in stool samples.
Why the study?
The study evaluated the clinical applicability of a novel reverse transcription-polymerase spiral reaction assay for detecting Coxsackievirus A16.
Does the RT-PSR assay accurately and rapidly detect Coxsackievirus A16 in clinical stool samples compared to qRT-PCR?
Observational (n=40)
No
Does the RT-PSR assay accurately and rapidly detect Coxsackievirus A16 in clinical stool samples compared to qRT-PCR?
The RT-PSR assay provides a rapid, simple, and cost-effective method for the clinical detection of Coxsackievirus A16 with 100% concordance to standard qRT-PCR.
May offer rapid, low-cost CVA16 detection; leaves open larger prospective validation before clinical adoption.
copies/μl with excellent specificity. To test the clinical applicability of the method, 40 clinical stool samples were analyzed using RT-PSR and quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, and comparison showed that the coincidence rate was 100%. Compared with other similar detection methods, RT-PSR requires less time, simpler operation, and lower cost. These results prove that our novel, simple, and reliable isothermal nucleic acid testing assay has potential application for clinical detection of CVA-16.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
He et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD) (n=40). Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Spiral Reaction (RT-PSR) vs. quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) was evaluated on Coincidence rate for CVA-16 detection. RT-PSR demonstrated a 100% coincidence rate with qRT-PCR for detecting Coxsackievirus A16 in clinical stool samples, providing a rapid diagnostic method for hand, foot, and mouth disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: