Comparative Evaluation of ELISA and Real-time PCR Tests to Detect COVID-19

Saye Moshashei, Haniyeh Bashi Zadeh Fakhar, Babak Shaghaghi, Melika Jalalian
{"title":"Comparative Evaluation of ELISA and Real-time PCR Tests to Detect COVID-19","authors":"Saye Moshashei, Haniyeh Bashi Zadeh Fakhar, Babak Shaghaghi, Melika Jalalian","doi":"10.18502/jmb.v12i1.15019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Considering the wide spread of covid-19 and its high death rate, it is very important to find a sensitive and accurate diagnostic method. Thus, this study compared two main diagnostic approaches; PCR and ELISA, to detect COVID-19. \nMethods: Fifty patients admitted to Baghiyatalah Hospital were examined to detect COVID-19 RNA by Real-time PCR method, as well as for the presence of IgG and IgM antibodies by ELISA method. The results were statistically analysed by SPSS software. \nResults: The mean age of patients is 38.4 years old. The percentage of positive cases of COVID-19 in the studied patients according to PCR and ELISA tests was 66% and 70%, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between positive cases of COVID-19 detected by PCR and ELISA with emerging fever, weakness, and lethargy . The diagnostic value of ELISA versus PCR showed that the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and true positive rate were 100%, 88.2%, 8.5, and 94.29%, respectively. \nConclusion: Although the sensitivity of detection in Real-time PCR is higher than that in ELISA, there is a high agreement between the two methods when used for diagnosis of COVID-19.","PeriodicalId":30437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Bacteriology","volume":"20 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Bacteriology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jmb.v12i1.15019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Considering the wide spread of covid-19 and its high death rate, it is very important to find a sensitive and accurate diagnostic method. Thus, this study compared two main diagnostic approaches; PCR and ELISA, to detect COVID-19. Methods: Fifty patients admitted to Baghiyatalah Hospital were examined to detect COVID-19 RNA by Real-time PCR method, as well as for the presence of IgG and IgM antibodies by ELISA method. The results were statistically analysed by SPSS software. Results: The mean age of patients is 38.4 years old. The percentage of positive cases of COVID-19 in the studied patients according to PCR and ELISA tests was 66% and 70%, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between positive cases of COVID-19 detected by PCR and ELISA with emerging fever, weakness, and lethargy . The diagnostic value of ELISA versus PCR showed that the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and true positive rate were 100%, 88.2%, 8.5, and 94.29%, respectively. Conclusion: Although the sensitivity of detection in Real-time PCR is higher than that in ELISA, there is a high agreement between the two methods when used for diagnosis of COVID-19.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
检测 COVID-19 的酶联免疫吸附试验和实时 PCR 试验的比较评估
背景:考虑到 COVID-19 的广泛传播和高死亡率,找到一种敏感而准确的诊断方法非常重要。因此,本研究比较了检测 COVID-19 的两种主要诊断方法:PCR 和 ELISA。方法对巴吉雅塔拉医院收治的 50 名患者进行检查,采用实时 PCR 法检测 COVID-19 RNA,并采用 ELISA 法检测是否存在 IgG 和 IgM 抗体。结果通过 SPSS 软件进行统计分析。结果患者平均年龄为 38.4 岁。根据聚合酶链反应和酶联免疫吸附试验,研究对象中 COVID-19 阳性病例的比例分别为 66% 和 70%。PCR和ELISA检测出的COVID-19阳性病例与新出现的发热、虚弱和嗜睡之间存在明显的统计学差异。ELISA 与 PCR 的诊断价值显示,两者的灵敏度、特异性、阳性似然比和真阳性率分别为 100%、88.2%、8.5 和 94.29%。结论虽然实时 PCR 的检测灵敏度高于 ELISA,但这两种方法在用于诊断 COVID-19 时具有很高的一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Helicobacter Pylori and Alopecia Areata: A True Association or Coincidental Finding? Molecular Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis in Women with Frequent Abortions Biofilm Formation by Quorum Sensing and Manners to Deal It Comparison of RT-PCR and ELISA Methods in the Diagnosis of Hepatitis C Virus in Patients Meningoencephalitic Listeriosis in Iranian Sheep and Goats
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1