Rev Esp Quimioter 2022; 35(4):401-405

Comparison between five PCR techniques for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2

ALBERTO TENORIO-ABREU, ANA RUIZ-CASTILLO, ANTONIO FRANCISCO GUZMÁN-GONZÁLEZ, ALEJANDRO PEÑA-MONJE, JOSÉ MARÍA SAAVEDRA-MARTÍN, FRANCISCO FRANCO-ÁLVAREZ DE LUNAO

Published: 20 June 2022

http://www.doi.org/10.37201/req/076.2020

Introduction. Since the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 appeared, there have been numerous techniques that have been developed for the diagnosis or monitoring of infection, both direct and serological techniques. Choosing a good diagnostic tool is essential for epidemiological control. The objective was to compare five commercialized RT-PCR techniques in real time, in sensitivity, specificity and agreement for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Material and methods. Five commercial RT-PCR kits for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 were compared. Eight known positive samples were taken and subjected to seven different dilutions or concentrations, and another 135 negative samples were used to determine sensitivity, specificity, and agreement values.
Results. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for the Palex, Roche and GeneXpert techniques with respect to Seegene were identical, corresponding to 98.21%, 100%, 100% and 99.26% respectively. For Becton Dickinson the sensitivity was 89.28%, the specificity of 100%, the PPV of 100% and the NPV of 95.74%. The agreement using the Kappa index for Palex, Roche and GeneXpert was 0.9892, while the agreement for Becton Dickinson was with a Kappa index of 0.9215.
Conclusion. All commercial RT-PCR kits had high sensitivities and specificities, as well as PPV, NPV, and concordance.

Rev Esp Quimioter 2022; 35(4):401-405 [Texto completo PDF]