Key result
A novel quantitative PCR-enhanced immunoassay (QPIA) demonstrated 70% sensitivity and 80% specificity for the diagnosis of enterovirus infection.
Why the study?
Does QPIA accurately detect enteroviral IgM for the diagnosis of aseptic meningitis compared to SPRIST and RIA?
Population
Serum samples from aseptic meningitis patients and controls across multiple groups
Comparison
Quantitative PCR-Enhanced Immunoassay for… vs Solid-phase reverse immunosorbent test, EV IgM…
Authors
Loading...
Should not yet change diagnostic practice; leaves open prospective validation of QPIA for enterovirus.
Observational
Does QPIA accurately detect enteroviral IgM for the diagnosis of aseptic meningitis compared to SPRIST and RIA?
Effect estimate: Sensitivity 70%, Specificity 80%
QPIA provides a rational, generally applicable strategy for detecting enteroviral IgM with minimal antigen purification.
Elfaitouri et al. (2005) conducted an observational in Aseptic meningitis and Enterovirus infection. Quantitative PCR-enhanced immunoassay (QPIA) vs. Solid-phase reverse immunosorbent test (SPRIST), radioimmunoassay (RIA), and EV PCR was evaluated on Diagnosis of enterovirus infection (sensitivity and specificity) (Sensitivity 70%, Specificity 80%). A novel quantitative PCR-enhanced immunoassay (QPIA) demonstrated 70% sensitivity and 80% specificity for the diagnosis of enterovirus infection.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: