The diagnostic accuracy of seven commercial molecular in vitro SARS-CoV-2 detection tests: a rapid meta-analysis

七种商业化体外SARS-CoV-2分子检测方法的诊断准确性:一项快速荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy parameters of seven commercial molecular in vitro diagnostic tests for detecting SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Studies evaluating the accuracy of seven different commercial molecular diagnostic tests for detecting SARS-CoV-2 (Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test, Simplexa COVID-19 Direct, Abbott ID NOW COVID-19, Cobas SARS-CoV-2, Allplex 2019-nCoV Assay, Panther Fusion SARS-CoV-2, and BioFire COVID-19 Test) were included. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 checklist. A bivariate random-effects regression model was implemented. RESULTS: Meta-analysis of 12 included studies showed that the performances of commercial COVID-19 molecular in vitro diagnostic tests were high, with a summary sensitivity of 95.9% (95% CI 93.9-97.2%, I(2) = 60.22%) and specificity of 97.2% (95% CI 95.5-98.3%, I(2) = 56.66%). Among seven evaluated tests, the Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 and Simplexa COVID-19 Direct displayed lower sensitivity (91.6%, 95% CI 80.5-96.6% and 92%, 95% CI 86.2-95.5, respectively). CONCLUSION: All evaluated tests showed good accuracy. However, the slightly lower sensitivity observed in the Abbott ID Now COVID-19 and Simplexa COVID-19 Direct should be considered when deciding on a test platform. Moreover, the diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 commercial diagnostic tests should be weighed against their ease of use and speed.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。