Timely diagnosis of respiratory tract infections: evaluation of the performance of the Respifinder assay compared to the xTAG respiratory viral panel assay.
J Clin Virol 2011;
52:314-6. [PMID:
21925937 PMCID:
PMC7185546 DOI:
10.1016/j.jcv.2011.08.017]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2011] [Revised: 08/10/2011] [Accepted: 08/16/2011] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Background
Respiratory tract infections are the most common cause of hospitalization in infants and young children and are typically caused by viral or, less commonly, bacterial pathogens.
Existing non-molecular diagnostic methods have several drawbacks such as limited sensitivity, long turn-a-round time and limited number of pathogens that can be detected.
Objectives
Nucleic acid amplification methods can increase sensitivity and enable the initiation of appropriate interventions without delay.
Broad-spectrum detection and identification circumvent the use of individual diagnostic DNA or RNA based assays. At present, several commercial assays are available for broad-spectrum detection.
Study design
We compared the performance of the xTAG Respiratory Viral Panel (RVP) (Luminex Molecular Diagnostics, Toronto, Canada) with that of the Respifinder (Pathofinder, Maastricht, Netherlands) for 9 external quality assurance (EQA) panels (QCMD, Scotland) consisting of a total of 106 EQA samples.
Results
Both the RVP and the Respifinder assay have an excellent specificity. Sensitivity was 33% and 78% for the RVP and the Respifinder assay, respectively. For both assays, sensitivity was low for weak positive samples.
Discussion
The results of our study seem to indicate a better sensitivity for the Respifinder. Analysis of patient samples is necessary to evaluate the clinical performance.
Collapse