26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Systematic review with meta-analysis of the accuracy of diagnostic tests for COVID-19

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Highlights

          • RT-PCR followed by CT shows high sensitivity for detecting COVID-19

          • Immunological tests should use a combination of IgG and IgM

          • The genes E and RdRp present high analytical sensitivity to detect the virus

          • Assays for molecular diagnosis should employ two-target systems

          • Studies of diagnostic tests for COVID-19 are of moderate methodological quality

          Abstract

          Objective

          . To collate the evidence on the accuracy parameters of all available diagnostic methods for detecting SARS-CoV-2.

          Methods

          . A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. Searches were conducted in Pubmed and Scopus (April 2020). Studies reporting data on sensitivity or specificity of diagnostic tests for COVID-19 using any human biological sample were included.

          Results

          . Sixteen studies were evaluated. Meta-analysis showed that computed tomography has high sensitivity (91.9% [89.8–93.7%]), but low specificity (25.1% [21.0–29.5%]). The combination of IgM and IgG antibodies demonstrated promising results for both parameters (84.5% [82.2%-86.6%]; 91.6% [86.0%-95.4%], respectively). For RT-PCR tests, rectal stools/swab, urine, and plasma were less sensitive while sputum (97.2% [90.3–99.7%]) presented higher sensitivity for detecting the virus.

          Conclusions

          . RT-PCR remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of COVID-19 in sputum samples. However, the combination of different diagnostic tests is highly recommended to achieve adequate sensitivity and specificity.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019

          Summary In December 2019, a cluster of patients with pneumonia of unknown cause was linked to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan, China. A previously unknown betacoronavirus was discovered through the use of unbiased sequencing in samples from patients with pneumonia. Human airway epithelial cells were used to isolate a novel coronavirus, named 2019-nCoV, which formed a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus, Orthocoronavirinae subfamily. Different from both MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, 2019-nCoV is the seventh member of the family of coronaviruses that infect humans. Enhanced surveillance and further investigation are ongoing. (Funded by the National Key Research and Development Program of China and the National Major Project for Control and Prevention of Infectious Disease in China.)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR

            Background The ongoing outbreak of the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) poses a challenge for public health laboratories as virus isolates are unavailable while there is growing evidence that the outbreak is more widespread than initially thought, and international spread through travellers does already occur. Aim We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available. Methods Here we present a validated diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV, its design relying on close genetic relatedness of 2019-nCoV with SARS coronavirus, making use of synthetic nucleic acid technology. Results The workflow reliably detects 2019-nCoV, and further discriminates 2019-nCoV from SARS-CoV. Through coordination between academic and public laboratories, we confirmed assay exclusivity based on 297 original clinical specimens containing a full spectrum of human respiratory viruses. Control material is made available through European Virus Archive – Global (EVAg), a European Union infrastructure project. Conclusion The present study demonstrates the enormous response capacity achieved through coordination of academic and public laboratories in national and European research networks.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Incubation Period of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) From Publicly Reported Confirmed Cases: Estimation and Application

              Background: A novel human coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was identified in China in December 2019. There is limited support for many of its key epidemiologic features, including the incubation period for clinical disease (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]), which has important implications for surveillance and control activities. Objective: To estimate the length of the incubation period of COVID-19 and describe its public health implications. Design: Pooled analysis of confirmed COVID-19 cases reported between 4 January 2020 and 24 February 2020. Setting: News reports and press releases from 50 provinces, regions, and countries outside Wuhan, Hubei province, China. Participants: Persons with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection outside Hubei province, China. Measurements: Patient demographic characteristics and dates and times of possible exposure, symptom onset, fever onset, and hospitalization. Results: There were 181 confirmed cases with identifiable exposure and symptom onset windows to estimate the incubation period of COVID-19. The median incubation period was estimated to be 5.1 days (95% CI, 4.5 to 5.8 days), and 97.5% of those who develop symptoms will do so within 11.5 days (CI, 8.2 to 15.6 days) of infection. These estimates imply that, under conservative assumptions, 101 out of every 10 000 cases (99th percentile, 482) will develop symptoms after 14 days of active monitoring or quarantine. Limitation: Publicly reported cases may overrepresent severe cases, the incubation period for which may differ from that of mild cases. Conclusion: This work provides additional evidence for a median incubation period for COVID-19 of approximately 5 days, similar to SARS. Our results support current proposals for the length of quarantine or active monitoring of persons potentially exposed to SARS-CoV-2, although longer monitoring periods might be justified in extreme cases. Primary Funding Source: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, and Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Am J Infect Control
                Am J Infect Control
                American Journal of Infection Control
                Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc.
                0196-6553
                1527-3296
                10 July 2020
                10 July 2020
                Affiliations
                [a ]Pharmaceutical Sciences Postgraduate Program, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
                [b ]Department of Pharmacy, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: Prof. Dr. Roberto Pontarolo, Department of Pharmacy, Federal University of Paraná, Av. Lothário Meissner, 632, 80210-170, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil. Phone: +55 41 33604094; Fax: +55 41 33604101 pontarolo@ 123456ufpr.br
                Article
                S0196-6553(20)30693-3
                10.1016/j.ajic.2020.07.011
                7350782
                32659413
                38634aba-122e-4b7c-8d1f-fff87e41066a
                © 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Categories
                Article

                covid-19,diagnostic,systematic review,sensitivity,specificity

                Comments

                Comment on this article