1. Главная
  2. Ресурсы
  3. Библиотечный поиск
A systematic andmeta-analysis reviewon the diagnosticaccuracy ofantibodies in theserological diagnosisof COVID-19 Arthur VengesaiHerald MidziMaritha Kasambala2021 год

A systematic and meta-analysis review on the diagnostic accuracy of antibodies in the serological diagnosis of COVID-19

Полный текстСтраница публикацииПубликация в OpenAlex
Аннотация: Abstract Background Serological testing based on different antibody types are an alternative method being used to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 and has the potential of having higher diagnostic accuracy compared to the current gold standard rRT-PCR. Therefore, the objective of this review was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of IgG and IgM based point-of-care (POC) lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay (CLIA), fluorescence enzyme-linked immunoassay (FIA) and ELISA systems that detect SARS-CoV-2 antigens. Method A systematic literature search was carried out in PubMed, Medline complete and MedRxiv. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of serological assays for SARS-CoV-2 were eligible. Study selection and data-extraction were performed by two authors independently. QUADAS-2 checklist tool was used to assess the quality of the studies. The bivariate model and the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve model were performed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the serological tests. Subgroup meta-analysis was performed to explore the heterogeneity. Results The pooled sensitivity for IgG ( n = 17), IgM ( n = 16) and IgG-IgM ( n = 24) based LFIA tests were 0.5856, 0.4637 and 0.6886, respectively compared to rRT-PCR method. The pooled sensitivity for IgG ( n = 9) and IgM ( n = 10) based CLIA tests were 0.9311 and 0.8516, respectively compared to rRT-PCR. The pooled sensitivity the IgG ( n = 10), IgM ( n = 11) and IgG-IgM ( n = 5) based ELISA tests were 0.8292, 0.8388 and 0.8531 respectively compared to rRT-PCR. All tests displayed high specificities ranging from 0.9693 to 0.9991. Amongst the evaluated tests, IgG based CLIA expressed the highest sensitivity signifying its accurate detection of the largest proportion of infections identified by rRT-PCR. ELISA and CLIA tests performed better in terms of sensitivity compared to LFIA. IgG based tests performed better compared to IgM except for the ELISA. Conclusions We report that IgG-IgM based ELISA tests have the best overall diagnostic test accuracy. Moreover, irrespective of the method, a combined IgG/IgM test seems to be a better choice in terms of sensitivity than measuring either antibody type independently. Given the poor performances of the current LFIA devices, there is a need for more research on the development of highly sensitivity and specific POC LFIA that are adequate for most individual patient applications and attractive for large sero-prevalence studies. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020179112
Год издания: 2021
Авторы: Arthur Vengesai, Herald Midzi, Maritha Kasambala, Hamlet Mutandadzi, Tariro L. Mduluza‐Jokonya, Simbarashe Rusakaniko, Francisca Mutapi, Thajasvarie Naicker, Takafira Mduluza
Издательство: BioMed Central
Источник: Systematic Reviews
Ключевые слова: SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing, SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research, Biosensors and Analytical Detection
Другие ссылки: Systematic Reviews (HTML)
DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (HTML)
Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (HTML)
PubMed Central (HTML)
PubMed (HTML)