Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1016/j.cca.2021.02.014 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1016/j.cca.2021.02.014 33626369!7897404!33626369     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Clin+Chim+Acta 2021 ; 517 (ä): 54-59 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=33626369|t=2021. Salivary SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid detection: A prospective cohort study |pdf=|usr=}}{{33626369}} gab.com Text Salivary SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid detection: A prospective cohort study JO: Clin Chim Acta http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33626369 #FOAvip BACKGROUND AND AIM: SARS-CoV-2 quick testing is relevant for the containment of new pandemic waves. Antigen testing in self-collected saliva might be useful. We compared salivary and naso-pharyngeal swab (NPS) SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection by a rapid chemiluminescent assay (CLEIA) and two different point-of-care (POC) immunochromatographic assays, with results of molecular testing. METHODS: 234 patients were prospectively enrolled. Paired self-collected saliva (Salivette) and NPS were obtained to perform rRT-PCR, chemiluminescent (Lumipulse G) and POC (NPS: Fujirebio and Abbott; saliva: Fujirebio) for SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection. RESULTS: The overall agreement between NPS and saliva rRT-PCR was 78.7%, reaching 91.7% at the first week from symptoms. SARS-CoV-2 CLEIA antigen was highly accurate in distinguishing positive and negative NPS (ROC-AUC = 0.939, 95%CI:0.903-0.977), with 81.6% sensitivity and 93.8% specificity. This assay on saliva reached the optimal value within 7 days from symptoms onset (Sensitivity: 72%; Specificity: 97%). Saliva POC antigen was limited in sensitivity (13%), performing better in NPS (Sensitivity: 48% and 66%; Specificity: 100% and 99% for Espline and Abbott respectively), depending on viral loads. CONCLUSIONS: Self-collected saliva is a valid alternative to NPS for SARS-CoV-2 detection by molecular, but also by CLEIA antigen testing, which is therefore potentially useful for large scale screening. Twit Text FOAVip Salivary SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid detection: A prospective cohort study ????Clin Chim Acta http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33626369 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33626369 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|33626369}}</ref> Salivary SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid detection: A prospective cohort study #MMPMID33626369 Basso D; Aita A; Padoan A; Cosma C; Navaglia F; Moz S; Contran N; Zambon CF; Maria Cattelan A; Plebani M Clin Chim Acta 2021[Jun]; 517 (ä): 54-59 PMID33626369show ga BACKGROUND AND AIM: SARS-CoV-2 quick testing is relevant for the containment of new pandemic waves. Antigen testing in self-collected saliva might be useful. We compared salivary and naso-pharyngeal swab (NPS) SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection by a rapid chemiluminescent assay (CLEIA) and two different point-of-care (POC) immunochromatographic assays, with results of molecular testing. METHODS: 234 patients were prospectively enrolled. Paired self-collected saliva (Salivette) and NPS were obtained to perform rRT-PCR, chemiluminescent (Lumipulse G) and POC (NPS: Fujirebio and Abbott; saliva: Fujirebio) for SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection. RESULTS: The overall agreement between NPS and saliva rRT-PCR was 78.7%, reaching 91.7% at the first week from symptoms. SARS-CoV-2 CLEIA antigen was highly accurate in distinguishing positive and negative NPS (ROC-AUC = 0.939, 95%CI:0.903-0.977), with 81.6% sensitivity and 93.8% specificity. This assay on saliva reached the optimal value within 7 days from symptoms onset (Sensitivity: 72%; Specificity: 97%). Saliva POC antigen was limited in sensitivity (13%), performing better in NPS (Sensitivity: 48% and 66%; Specificity: 100% and 99% for Espline and Abbott respectively), depending on viral loads. CONCLUSIONS: Self-collected saliva is a valid alternative to NPS for SARS-CoV-2 detection by molecular, but also by CLEIA antigen testing, which is therefore potentially useful for large scale screening. |Antigens, Viral/*analysis[MESH] |COVID-19/*diagnosis[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Luminescent Measurements[MESH] |Nasopharynx/virology[MESH] |Pandemics[MESH] |Point-of-Care Testing[MESH] |Prospective Studies[MESH] |SARS-CoV-2[MESH] |Saliva/*chemistry[MESH]Salivary SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid detection: A prospective cohort stud(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing