Key result
Compared to RT-qPCR, the duplex real-time RT-RAA assay demonstrated clinical diagnostic sensitivities of 92.3% for EV71 and 99.0% for CA16, with specificities of 99.7% and 100%, respectively.
Why the study?
Enterovirus 71 and coxsackievirus A16 are the primary causes of hand, foot, and mouth disease, making simple and rapid detection critical in resource-limited settings.
Do duplex real time RT-RAA and LFS RT-RAA assays accurately detect EV71 and CA16 compared to RT-qPCR in patients suspected of HFMD?
Observational (n=445)
Yes
Do duplex real time RT-RAA and LFS RT-RAA assays accurately detect EV71 and CA16 compared to RT-qPCR in patients suspected of HFMD?
Duplex real time RT-RAA and LFS RT-RAA assays provide rapid, sensitive, and specific detection of EV71 and CA16, making them potentially suitable for resource-limited primary clinical settings.
Supports rapid EV71/CA16 detection in resource-limited settings; leaves open prospective validation before routine adoption.
BACKGROUND: Enterovirus 71 (EV71) and coxsackievirus A16 (CA16) are the two main etiological agents of Hand, Foot and Mouth Disease (HFMD). Simple and rapid detection of EV71 and CA16 is critical in resource-limited settings. METHODS: Duplex real time reverse-transcription recombinase aided amplification (RT-RAA) assays incorporating competitive internal amplification controls (IAC) and visible RT-RAA assays combined with lateral flow strip (LFS) for detection of EV71 and CA16 were developed respectively. Duplex real time RT-RAA assays were performed at 42 °C within 30 min using a portable real-time fluorescence detector, while LFS RT-RAA assays were performed at 42 °C within 30 min in an incubator. Recombinant plasmids containing conserved VP1 genes were used to analyze the sensitivities of these two methods. A total of 445 clinical specimens from patients who were suspected of being infected with HFMD were used to evaluate the performance of the assays. RESULTS: The limit of detection (LoD) of the duplex real time RT-RAA for EV71 and CA16 was 47 copies and 38 copies per reaction, respectively. The LoD of the LFS RT-RAA for EV71 and CA16 were both 91 copies per reaction. There was no cross reactivity with other enteroviruses. Compared to reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR), the clinical diagnostic sensitivities of the duplex real time RT-RAA assay were 92.3% for EV71 and 99.0% for CA16, and the clinical diagnostic specificities were 99.7 and 100%, respectively. The clinical diagnostic sensitivities of the LFS RT-RAA assay were 90.1% for EV71 and 94.9% for CA16, and the clinical diagnostic specificities were 99.7 and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The developed duplex real time RT-RAA and LFS RT-RAA assays for detection of EV71 and CA16 are potentially suitable in primary clinical settings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Hand, Foot and Mouth Disease (HFMD) (n=445). Duplex real time RT-RAA and LFS RT-RAA assays vs. RT-qPCR was evaluated on Clinical diagnostic sensitivity of duplex real time RT-RAA for EV71. Compared to RT-qPCR, the duplex real-time RT-RAA assay demonstrated clinical diagnostic sensitivities of 92.3% for EV71 and 99.0% for CA16, with specificities of 99.7% and 100%, respectively.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: