LIVIVO - The Search Portal for Life Sciences

zur deutschen Oberfläche wechseln
Advanced search

Search results

Result 1 - 3 of total 3

Search options

  1. Article ; Online: Diagnostic performance of seven rapid IgG/IgM antibody tests and the Euroimmun IgA/IgG ELISA in COVID-19 patients.

    Van Elslande, J / Houben, E / Depypere, M / Brackenier, A / Desmet, S / André, E / Van Ranst, M / Lagrou, K / Vermeersch, P

    Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases

    2020  Volume 26, Issue 8, Page(s) 1082–1087

    Abstract: Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of seven rapid IgG/IgM tests and the Euroimmun ... for all seven LFAs compared to 89.5% for the IgG ELISA. The results for IgM varied significantly, and including ... Sensitivity and time to seropositivity was evaluated in 167 samples from 94 patients with COVID-19 confirmed ...

    Abstract Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of seven rapid IgG/IgM tests and the Euroimmun IgA/IgG ELISA for antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in COVID-19 patients.
    Methods: Specificity was evaluated in 103 samples collected before January 2020. Sensitivity and time to seropositivity was evaluated in 167 samples from 94 patients with COVID-19 confirmed with RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swab.
    Results: Specificity (confidence interval) of lateral flow assays (LFAs) was ≥91.3% (84.0-95.5) for IgM, ≥90.3% (82.9-94.8) for IgG, and ≥85.4% (77.2-91.1) for the combination IgM OR IgG. Specificity of the ELISA was 96.1% (90.1-98.8) for IgG and only 73.8% (64.5-81.4) for IgA. Sensitivity 14-25 days after the onset of symptoms was between ≥92.1% (78.5-98.0) and 100% (95.7-100) for IgG LFA compared to 89.5% (75.3-96.4) for IgG ELISA. Positivity of IgM OR IgG for LFA resulted in a decrease in specificity compared to IgG alone without a gain in diagnostic performance, except for VivaDiag. The results for IgM varied significantly between the LFAs with an average overall agreement of only 70% compared to 89% for IgG. The average dynamic trend to seropositivity for IgM was not shorter than for IgG. At the time of hospital admission the sensitivity of LFA was <60%.
    Conclusions: Sensitivity for the detection of IgG antibodies 14-25 days after the onset of symptoms was ≥92.1% for all seven LFAs compared to 89.5% for the IgG ELISA. The results for IgM varied significantly, and including IgM antibodies in addition to IgG for the interpretation of LFAs did not improve the diagnostic performance.
    MeSH term(s) Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Antibodies, Viral/analysis ; Antigens, Viral/immunology ; Betacoronavirus/immunology ; COVID-19 ; Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis ; Coronavirus Infections/immunology ; Diagnostic Tests, Routine ; Female ; Humans ; Immunoglobulin A/metabolism ; Immunoglobulin G/metabolism ; Immunoglobulin M/metabolism ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Pandemics ; Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis ; Pneumonia, Viral/immunology ; SARS-CoV-2 ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Time Factors ; Young Adult
    Chemical Substances Antibodies, Viral ; Antigens, Viral ; Immunoglobulin A ; Immunoglobulin G ; Immunoglobulin M
    Keywords covid19
    Language English
    Publishing date 2020-05-28
    Publishing country England
    Document type Comparative Study ; Journal Article
    ZDB-ID 1328418-6
    ISSN 1469-0691 ; 1470-9465 ; 1198-743X
    ISSN (online) 1469-0691
    ISSN 1470-9465 ; 1198-743X
    DOI 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.05.023
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  2. Article ; Online: Diagnostic performance of seven rapid IgG/IgM antibody tests and the Euroimmun IgA/IgG ELISA in COVID-19 patients

    Van Elslande, J. / Houben, E. / Depypere, M. / Brackenier, A. / Desmet, S. / André, E. / Van Ranst, M. / Lagrou, K. / Vermeersch, P.

    Clinical Microbiology and Infection

    2020  Volume 26, Issue 8, Page(s) 1082–1087

    Keywords Microbiology (medical) ; Infectious Diseases ; General Medicine ; covid19
    Language English
    Publisher Elsevier BV
    Publishing country us
    Document type Article ; Online
    ZDB-ID 1328418-6
    ISSN 1469-0691 ; 1470-9465 ; 1198-743X
    ISSN (online) 1469-0691
    ISSN 1470-9465 ; 1198-743X
    DOI 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.05.023
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

  3. Article: Diagnostic performance of seven rapid IgG/IgM antibody tests and the Euroimmun IgA/IgG ELISA in COVID-19 patients

    Van Elslande, J / Houben, E / Depypere, M / Brackenier, A / Desmet, S / André, E / Van Ranst, M / Lagrou, K / Vermeersch, P

    Clin Microbiol Infect

    Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of seven rapid IgG/IgM tests and the Euroimmun ... Sensitivity and time to seropositivity was evaluated in 167 samples from 94 patients with COVID-19 confirmed ... 1) for the combination IgM OR IgG. Specificity of the ELISA was 96.1% (90.1-98.8) for IgG and only ...

    Abstract OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of seven rapid IgG/IgM tests and the Euroimmun IgA/IgG ELISA for antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Specificity was evaluated in 103 samples collected before January 2020. Sensitivity and time to seropositivity was evaluated in 167 samples from 94 patients with COVID-19 confirmed with RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swab. RESULTS: Specificity (confidence interval) of lateral flow assays (LFAs) was ≥91.3% (84.0-95.5) for IgM, ≥90.3% (82.9-94.8) for IgG, and ≥85.4% (77.2-91.1) for the combination IgM OR IgG. Specificity of the ELISA was 96.1% (90.1-98.8) for IgG and only 73.8% (64.5-81.4) for IgA. Sensitivity 14-25 days after the onset of symptoms was between ≥92.1% (78.5-98.0) and 100% (95.7-100) for IgG LFA compared to 89.5% (75.3-96.4) for IgG ELISA. Positivity of IgM OR IgG for LFA resulted in a decrease in specificity compared to IgG alone without a gain in diagnostic performance, except for VivaDiag. The results for IgM varied significantly between the LFAs with an average overall agreement of only 70% compared to 89% for IgG. The average dynamic trend to seropositivity for IgM was not shorter than for IgG. At the time of hospital admission the sensitivity of LFA was <60%. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity for the detection of IgG antibodies 14-25 days after the onset of symptoms was ≥92.1% for all seven LFAs compared to 89.5% for the IgG ELISA. The results for IgM varied significantly, and including IgM antibodies in addition to IgG for the interpretation of LFAs did not improve the diagnostic performance.
    Keywords covid19
    Publisher WHO
    Document type Article
    Note WHO #Covidence: #594311
    Database COVID19

    Kategorien

To top