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.jcv.2021.104785 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1016/j.jcv.2021.104785 33711694!7934791!33711694     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       J+Clin+Virol 2021 ; 137 (ä): 104785 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=33711694|t=2021. Evaluation of three rapid lateral flow antigen detection tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection |pdf=|usr=}}{{33711694}} gab.com Text Evaluation of three rapid lateral flow antigen detection tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection JO: J Clin Virol http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33711694 #FOAvip INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to high demand of diagnostic tools. Rapid antigen detection tests have been developed and many have received regulatory acceptance such as CE IVD or FDA markings. Their performance needs to be carefully assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 158 positive and 40 negative retrospective samples collected in saline and analyzed by a laboratory-developed RT-PCR test were used to evaluate Sofia (Quidel), Standard Q (SD Biosensor), and Panbio (Abbott) rapid antigen detection tests (RADTs). A subset of the specimens was subjected to virus culture. RESULTS: The specificity of all RADTs was 100 % and the sensitivity and percent agreement was 80 % and 85 % for Sofia, 81 % and 85 % for Standard Q, and 83 % and 86 % for Panbio, respectively. All three RADTs evaluated in this study reached a more than 90 % sensitivity for samples with a high viral load as estimated from the low Ct (Cycle threshold) values in the reference RT-PCR. Virus culture was successful in 80 % of specimens with a Ct value <25. CONCLUSIONS: As expected, the RADTs were less sensitive than RT-PCR. However, they benefit from the speed and ease of testing, and lower price as compared to RT-PCR. Repeated testing in appropriate settings may improve the overall performance. Twit Text FOAVip Evaluation of three rapid lateral flow antigen detection tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection ????J Clin Virol http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33711694 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33711694 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|33711694}}</ref> Evaluation of three rapid lateral flow antigen detection tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection #MMPMID33711694 Jaaskelainen AE; Ahava MJ; Jokela P; Szirovicza L; Pohjala S; Vapalahti O; Lappalainen M; Hepojoki J; Kurkela S J Clin Virol 2021[Apr]; 137 (ä): 104785 PMID33711694show ga INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to high demand of diagnostic tools. Rapid antigen detection tests have been developed and many have received regulatory acceptance such as CE IVD or FDA markings. Their performance needs to be carefully assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 158 positive and 40 negative retrospective samples collected in saline and analyzed by a laboratory-developed RT-PCR test were used to evaluate Sofia (Quidel), Standard Q (SD Biosensor), and Panbio (Abbott) rapid antigen detection tests (RADTs). A subset of the specimens was subjected to virus culture. RESULTS: The specificity of all RADTs was 100 % and the sensitivity and percent agreement was 80 % and 85 % for Sofia, 81 % and 85 % for Standard Q, and 83 % and 86 % for Panbio, respectively. All three RADTs evaluated in this study reached a more than 90 % sensitivity for samples with a high viral load as estimated from the low Ct (Cycle threshold) values in the reference RT-PCR. Virus culture was successful in 80 % of specimens with a Ct value <25. CONCLUSIONS: As expected, the RADTs were less sensitive than RT-PCR. However, they benefit from the speed and ease of testing, and lower price as compared to RT-PCR. Repeated testing in appropriate settings may improve the overall performance. |Antigens, Viral/*analysis[MESH] |COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods[MESH] |COVID-19 Serological Testing/*methods[MESH] |COVID-19 Testing/methods[MESH] |COVID-19/*diagnosis/immunology/virology[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Nasopharynx/virology[MESH] |Retrospective Studies[MESH] |SARS-CoV-2/immunology/*isolation & purification[MESH]Evaluation of three rapid lateral flow antigen detection tests for the(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing