Pitfalls of SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing at emergency department.


Journal

Infectious diseases (London, England)
ISSN: 2374-4243
Titre abrégé: Infect Dis (Lond)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101650235

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 2022
Historique:
pubmed: 1 6 2022
medline: 12 8 2022
entrez: 31 5 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Current method for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection is an RT-PCR test on the nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab. Rapid diagnosis is essential for containing viral spread and triage of symptomatic patients presenting to hospital ER departments. As a faster alternative to RT-PCR, we evaluated a SARS-Cov-2 Rapid Antigen test in symptomatic patients presenting to hospital ER departments. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen test (SD Biosensor) for detection of SARS-CoV-2 compared to RT-PCR. Our study showed inferior performance of the SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen test for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Firstly, because of the lack of specificity, which is potentially life-threatening due to the association of nosocomial-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondly, with a sensitivity of 45.5%, it is impossible to rule out SARS-CoV-2 infection, resulting in reflex PCR-testing. Comparison of viral load in RT-PCR positive samples with corresponding antigen results showed a significant difference between antigen positive and negative samples. COVID-19 infection will not be detected in patients admitted to the hospital in an early or late phase, typically associated with low viral loads. Sensitivity increases when testing within 5-7 symptomatic days, but the implementation of this cut-off is impractical in ER settings. However, diagnostic performance is better to detect high viral load (> = 5 log10 copies/mL) linked with contagiousness. Our study showed inferior performance of the Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen test (SD Biosensor) for detection of SARS-CoV-2 which limits its use as a diagnostic gatekeeper in ER departments, but is able to differentiate contagious individuals.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Current method for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection is an RT-PCR test on the nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab. Rapid diagnosis is essential for containing viral spread and triage of symptomatic patients presenting to hospital ER departments. As a faster alternative to RT-PCR, we evaluated a SARS-Cov-2 Rapid Antigen test in symptomatic patients presenting to hospital ER departments.
METHODS
We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen test (SD Biosensor) for detection of SARS-CoV-2 compared to RT-PCR.
RESULTS
Our study showed inferior performance of the SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen test for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Firstly, because of the lack of specificity, which is potentially life-threatening due to the association of nosocomial-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondly, with a sensitivity of 45.5%, it is impossible to rule out SARS-CoV-2 infection, resulting in reflex PCR-testing. Comparison of viral load in RT-PCR positive samples with corresponding antigen results showed a significant difference between antigen positive and negative samples. COVID-19 infection will not be detected in patients admitted to the hospital in an early or late phase, typically associated with low viral loads. Sensitivity increases when testing within 5-7 symptomatic days, but the implementation of this cut-off is impractical in ER settings. However, diagnostic performance is better to detect high viral load (> = 5 log10 copies/mL) linked with contagiousness.
CONCLUSION
Our study showed inferior performance of the Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen test (SD Biosensor) for detection of SARS-CoV-2 which limits its use as a diagnostic gatekeeper in ER departments, but is able to differentiate contagious individuals.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35638185
doi: 10.1080/23744235.2022.2083226
doi:

Substances chimiques

Antigens, Viral 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

731-737

Auteurs

Eleonora Cottone (E)

AZ Delta Medical Laboratories, AZ Delta General Hospital, Roeselare, Belgium.

Frederik Van Hoecke (F)

AZ Delta Medical Laboratories, AZ Delta General Hospital, Roeselare, Belgium.

Geert Antoine Martens (GA)

AZ Delta Medical Laboratories, AZ Delta General Hospital, Roeselare, Belgium.
Department of Biomolecular Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

Emmanuel De Laere (E)

AZ Delta Medical Laboratories, AZ Delta General Hospital, Roeselare, Belgium.

Roos De Smedt (R)

AZ Delta Medical Laboratories, AZ Delta General Hospital, Roeselare, Belgium.

Steven Vervaeke (S)

AZ Delta Medical Laboratories, AZ Delta General Hospital, Roeselare, Belgium.

Merijn Vanhee (M)

Department of Laboratory Medicine, AZ Sint-Jan AV, Brugge, Belgium.

Dieter De Smet (D)

AZ Delta Medical Laboratories, AZ Delta General Hospital, Roeselare, Belgium.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH