Key result
The newly developed real-time RT-PCR assays detected HEV71 and CVA16 in 69.48% of clinical specimens, which was higher than the detection rates of conventional RT-PCR and virus isolation.
Why the study?
Do real-time RT-PCR assays improve the detection rate of HFMD pathogens compared to conventional RT-PCR and virus isolation?
Cross-Sectional (n=179)
Do real-time RT-PCR assays improve the detection rate of HFMD pathogens compared to conventional RT-PCR and virus isolation?
Real-time RT-PCR assays significantly improve the detection rate of HFMD pathogens compared to conventional methods, aiding in rapid identification during outbreaks.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
These assays may accelerate HFMD pathogen detection in outbreaks; leaves open routine adoption pending prospective validation.
Large-scale Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease (HFMD) outbreaks have frequently occurred in China since 2008, affecting more than one million children and causing several hundred children deaths every year. The pathogens of HFMD are mainly human enteroviruses (HEVs). Among them, human enterovirus 71 (HEV71) and coxsackievirus A16 (CVA16) are the most common pathogens of HFMD. However, other HEVs could also cause HFMD. To rapidly detect HEV71 and CVA16, and ensure detection of all HEVs causing HFMD, two real-time hybridization probe-based RT-PCR assays were developed in this study. One is a multiplex real-time RT-PCR assay, which was developed to detect and differentiate HEV71 specifically from CVA16 directly from clinical specimens within 1-2 h, and the other is a broad-spectrum real-time RT-PCR assay, which targeted almost all HEVs. The experiments confirmed that the two assays have high sensitivity and specificity, and the sensitivity was up to 0.1 TCID50/ml for detection of HEVs, HEV71, and CVA16, respectively. A total of 213 clinical specimens were simultaneously detected by three kinds of assays, including the two real-time RT-PCR assays, direct conventional RT-PCR assay, and virus isolation assay on human rhabdomyosarcoma cells (RD cells). The total positive rate of both HEV71 and CVA16 was 69.48% with real-time RT-PCR assay, 47.42% with RT-PCR assay, and 34.58% with virus isolation assay. One HFMD clinical specimen was positive for HEV, but negative for HEV71 or CVA16, which was identified as Echovirus 11 (Echo11) by virus isolation, RT-PCR, and sequencing for the VP1 gene. The two real-time RT-PCR assays had been applied in 31 provincial HFMD labs to detect the pathogens of HFMD, which has contributed to the rapid identification of the pathogens in the early stages of HFMD outbreaks, and helped to clarify the etiologic agents of HFMD in China.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cui et al. (2013) conducted a cross-sectional in Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease (HFMD) (n=179). Real-time RT-PCR assays vs. Conventional RT-PCR and virus isolation was evaluated on Total positive rate of HEV71 and CVA16. The newly developed real-time RT-PCR assays detected HEV71 and CVA16 in 69.48% of clinical specimens, which was higher than the detection rates of conventional RT-PCR and virus isolation.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: