受 SARS-CoV-2 感染的鼻咽拭子标本个体与集合标本的 RT-PCR 周期阈值比较。

Narra J Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-19 DOI:10.52225/narra.v4i2.765
Handa Yani, Toh D Yuan, Aridamuriany D Lubis, Lia K Iswara, Inke Nd Lubis
{"title":"受 SARS-CoV-2 感染的鼻咽拭子标本个体与集合标本的 RT-PCR 周期阈值比较。","authors":"Handa Yani, Toh D Yuan, Aridamuriany D Lubis, Lia K Iswara, Inke Nd Lubis","doi":"10.52225/narra.v4i2.765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The molecular reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing of respiratory tract swabs has become mandatory to confirm the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, RT-PCR tests are expensive, require standardized equipment, and relatively long testing times, and the sample pooling method has been introduced to solve this issue. The aim of this study was to compare the cycle threshold (Ct) values of the individual sample and pooled sample methods to assess how accurate the pooling method was. Repeat RT-PCR examinations were initially performed to confirm the Ct values for each sample before running the pooled test procedure. Sample extraction and amplification were performed in both assays to detect ORF1ab, N, and E genes with a cut-off point value of Ct <38. Overall, there was no difference in Ct values between individual sample and pooled sample groups at all concentrations (<i>p</i>=0.259) and for all pooled sizes. Only pooled size of five could detect the Ct value in the pooled samples for all concentration samples, including low-concentration sample (Ct values 36 to 38). This study highlighted that pooled RT-PCR testing strategy did not reduce the quality of individually measured RT-PCR Ct values. A pool size of five could provide a practical technique to expand the screening capacity of RT-PCR.</p>","PeriodicalId":517416,"journal":{"name":"Narra J","volume":"4 2","pages":"e765"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11391988/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of RT-PCR cycle threshold values between individual and pooled SARS-CoV-2 infected nasopharyngeal swab specimens.\",\"authors\":\"Handa Yani, Toh D Yuan, Aridamuriany D Lubis, Lia K Iswara, Inke Nd Lubis\",\"doi\":\"10.52225/narra.v4i2.765\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The molecular reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing of respiratory tract swabs has become mandatory to confirm the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, RT-PCR tests are expensive, require standardized equipment, and relatively long testing times, and the sample pooling method has been introduced to solve this issue. The aim of this study was to compare the cycle threshold (Ct) values of the individual sample and pooled sample methods to assess how accurate the pooling method was. Repeat RT-PCR examinations were initially performed to confirm the Ct values for each sample before running the pooled test procedure. Sample extraction and amplification were performed in both assays to detect ORF1ab, N, and E genes with a cut-off point value of Ct <38. Overall, there was no difference in Ct values between individual sample and pooled sample groups at all concentrations (<i>p</i>=0.259) and for all pooled sizes. Only pooled size of five could detect the Ct value in the pooled samples for all concentration samples, including low-concentration sample (Ct values 36 to 38). This study highlighted that pooled RT-PCR testing strategy did not reduce the quality of individually measured RT-PCR Ct values. A pool size of five could provide a practical technique to expand the screening capacity of RT-PCR.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":517416,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Narra J\",\"volume\":\"4 2\",\"pages\":\"e765\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11391988/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Narra J\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v4i2.765\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Narra J","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v4i2.765","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对呼吸道拭子进行分子反转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)检测已成为确诊2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的必经之路。然而,RT-PCR 检测价格昂贵,需要标准化设备,检测时间相对较长,为了解决这一问题,人们引入了样本池方法。本研究的目的是比较单个样本和样本池方法的周期阈值(Ct),以评估样本池方法的准确性。在运行集合测试程序之前,首先进行重复 RT-PCR 检验,以确认每个样本的 Ct 值。在两种检测方法中都进行了样本提取和扩增,以检测 ORF1ab、N 和 E 基因(Ct 临界值 p=0.259)和所有集合样本量。在所有浓度样本(包括低浓度样本(Ct 值为 36 至 38))中,只有 5 个集合样本能检测到集合样本中的 Ct 值。这项研究强调,集合 RT-PCR 检测策略不会降低单独检测的 RT-PCR Ct 值的质量。5 个样本的集合规模可为扩大 RT-PCR 的筛选能力提供一种实用技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Comparison of RT-PCR cycle threshold values between individual and pooled SARS-CoV-2 infected nasopharyngeal swab specimens.

The molecular reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing of respiratory tract swabs has become mandatory to confirm the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, RT-PCR tests are expensive, require standardized equipment, and relatively long testing times, and the sample pooling method has been introduced to solve this issue. The aim of this study was to compare the cycle threshold (Ct) values of the individual sample and pooled sample methods to assess how accurate the pooling method was. Repeat RT-PCR examinations were initially performed to confirm the Ct values for each sample before running the pooled test procedure. Sample extraction and amplification were performed in both assays to detect ORF1ab, N, and E genes with a cut-off point value of Ct <38. Overall, there was no difference in Ct values between individual sample and pooled sample groups at all concentrations (p=0.259) and for all pooled sizes. Only pooled size of five could detect the Ct value in the pooled samples for all concentration samples, including low-concentration sample (Ct values 36 to 38). This study highlighted that pooled RT-PCR testing strategy did not reduce the quality of individually measured RT-PCR Ct values. A pool size of five could provide a practical technique to expand the screening capacity of RT-PCR.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Challenges and strategies of implementing active case finding for tuberculosis: A qualitative study at a high-burden primary healthcare center, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Biomarkers for diagnosis, disease progression, and therapeutic response in psoriasis vulgaris: A mini-review. Chronic tonsillitis and its potential alternative treatment: Exploration of the antibacterial activity of ethanolic Mentha piperita leaf extract against bacterial isolates from patients. Associations of VEGF and CA125 with disease stage and pain among women with endometriosis: A cross-sectional study in Indonesia. Comparison of interleukin-6 and serum creatinine levels in preeclampsia and normal pregnancy patients: A cross-sectional study in Indonesia.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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