These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of an in-house real-time RT-PCR assay with a commercial assay for detection of enterovirus RNA in clinical samples.
    Author: Selva L, Martinez-Planas A, García-García JJ, Casadevall R, Luaces C, Muñoz-Almagro C.
    Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis; 2012 May; 31(5):715-9. PubMed ID: 21805291.
    Abstract:
    Molecular detection of enterovirus (EV) RNA based on PCR methods is a quicker and more sensitive approach than culture methods. At present, different PCR-based methods for EV RNA detection are available, but comparisons of results obtained according to the different approaches are limited. We evaluated an in-house real-time RT-PCR assay with a commercialized TaqMan real-time RT-PCR kit for detection of EV. Consecutive clinical specimens from paediatric patients less than 6 years old with clinical suspicion of EV infection were analyzed between July and November 2010. After RNA extraction, samples were amplified both by the real-time RT-PCR commercial assay and the in-house assay. A total of 19 of 132 patients (14.4%) involving 20 samples (14 plasma samples and 6 CSF) were positive in at least one of the two assays. The sensitivity of the in-house assay when the MutaPLATE® assay was used as a reference was 90% (IC 95%; 74.35-100) and the specificity was 100% (IC 95%; 99.63-100). Cts results of two methods were statistically correlated (r = 0.774; P = 0.01). In conclusion, these two real-time RT-PCR assays are rapid and easy methods for detection of EV.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]