Key result
Simplexa Flu A/B & RSV PCR was significantly more sensitive than cytospin-DFA (81.4% for direct and 88.9% for extracts vs 66.3%, P<0.0001) but less sensitive than laboratory-developed TaqMan PCR.
Why the study?
Does Simplexa Flu A/B & RSV PCR improve diagnostic sensitivity compared to DFA for detecting respiratory viruses in hospitalized patients?
Cross-Sectional (n=445)
No
Does Simplexa Flu A/B & RSV PCR improve diagnostic sensitivity compared to DFA for detecting respiratory viruses in hospitalized patients?
Simplexa PCR methods offer improved sensitivity over DFA for detecting respiratory viruses, though they remain less sensitive than laboratory-developed TaqMan PCR.
Simplexa PCR may improve detection over DFA in hospitalized patients; leaves open whether it suffices versus TaqMan PCR.
To compare Simplexa Flu A/B & RSV PCR with cytospin-immunofluorescence and laboratory-developed TaqMan PCR methods, 445 nasopharyngeal samples were tested. Of these, 199 were positive (46 for respiratory syncytial virus [RSV], 120 for influenza A, and 33 for influenza B) and 246 were negative. The direct fluorescent-antibody assay (DFA) detected 132 (66.3%) positive samples, Simplexa direct detected 162 (81.4%), Simplexa using extracts detected 177 (88.9%), and lab-developed TaqMan PCR reference methods detected 199 (100%). The specificities were 99.6%, 100%, 100%, and 100%, respectively. The two Simplexa methods were more sensitive than the DFA (P = 0.0001) but less sensitive than the TaqMan reverse transcriptase PCR (P = 0.0001).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Landry et al. (2014) conducted a cross-sectional in Suspected respiratory viral infection (Influenza A/B, RSV) (n=445). Simplexa Flu A/B & RSV PCR vs. Cytospin-immunofluorescence (DFA) and laboratory-developed TaqMan PCR (LDT) was evaluated on Overall sensitivity for detecting RSV, Influenza A, and Influenza B (p=<0.0001). Simplexa Flu A/B & RSV PCR was significantly more sensitive than cytospin-DFA (81.4% for direct and 88.9% for extracts vs 66.3%, P<0.0001) but less sensitive than laboratory-developed TaqMan PCR.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: