Evaluación de la sensibilidad diagnóstica de tres técnicas de laboratorio para la infección por influenza A: inmunocromatografía, IFD e IFD con citocentrifugado versus RPC-TR

Simple item page
dc.catalogadoryvc
dc.contributor.authorWilhelm, Jan
dc.contributor.authorYubero, Joao
dc.contributor.authorFuentes, Constanza
dc.contributor.authorRios, Paulina
dc.contributor.authorLeyton, Oscar
dc.contributor.authorReyes Zaldívar, Felipe Tomas
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-28T15:48:03Z
dc.date.available2023-08-28T15:48:03Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: The specific diagnosis of influenza A infection makes. it possible to control its spread, decreases the unnecessary use of antibiotics, clinical procedures and laboratory test, and allows early recognition of outbreaks. Different technologies are currently available in Chile for this purpose. Objective: The study presented here compares the sensitivity for influenza A virus detection of immunocromatography (RIDT), direct fluorescent antibodies-DFA and DFA with cytocentrifugation against the gold standard, RT-PCR. Material and Methods: In 175 nasal swab samples influenza, RIDT and RT-PCR were performed. Another 1689 nasal swab samples were tested by DFA and RT-PCR for influenza A. Finally, 29 nasal swab samples confirmed as Influenza A positive by RT-PCR welt tested by DFA with cytocentrifugation. Results: The RIDT, DFA and DFA + cytocentrifugation sensitivity was 47,3%, 57,2% and 72,4%, respectively. Discussion and Conclusion: Their lower cost and faster turnaround time when compared to PCR make RIDT and DFA the tests of choice in diagnostic laboratories in Chile. However, their low sensitivity and NPV, especially during low season, makes more sensitive diagnostic tools necessary to confirm the results. In our study cytocentrifugation increased DFA sensitivity from 57% to 72%.
dc.fechaingreso.objetodigital2023-08-20
dc.format.extent4 páginas
dc.fuente.origenWOS
dc.identifier.doi10.4067/S0716-10182014000600009
dc.identifier.eissn0717-6341
dc.identifier.issn0716-1018
dc.identifier.pubmedidMEDLINE_ID:25679926
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.4067/S0716-10182014000600009
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.uc.cl/handle/11534/74516
dc.identifier.wosidWOS:000347596600009
dc.information.autorucEscuela de Medicina; Reyes Zaldívar, Felipe Tomas; 0000-0002-8980-8158; 237969
dc.issue.numero6
dc.language.isoes
dc.nota.accesoContenido completo
dc.pagina.final693
dc.pagina.inicio690
dc.publisherSOC CHILENA INFECTOLOGIA
dc.revistaREVISTA CHILENA DE INFECTOLOGIA
dc.rightsacceso abierto
dc.subjectInfluenza A
dc.subjectdirect fluorescent assay
dc.subjectimmunochromatography
dc.subjectcytocentrifugation
dc.subjectRT- PCR
dc.subjectRESPIRATORY VIRUSES
dc.subjectH1N1 INFLUENZA
dc.subject.ddc610
dc.subject.deweyMedicina y saludes_ES
dc.subject.ods03 Good Health and Well-being
dc.subject.odspa03 Salud y bienestar
dc.titleEvaluación de la sensibilidad diagnóstica de tres técnicas de laboratorio para la infección por influenza A: inmunocromatografía, IFD e IFD con citocentrifugado versus RPC-TR
dc.title.alternativeEvaluation of three laboratory methods diagnostic sensitivity in influenza A infection: RIDT, DFA and DFA with cytocentrifugation versus RT-PCR
dc.typeartículo
dc.volumen31
sipa.codpersvinculados237969
sipa.indexWoS
sipa.indexPubmed
sipa.trazabilidadWOS;05-06-2021
sipa.trazabilidadORCID;2023-08-20
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
TEXTO COMPLETO_Evaluación de la sensibilidad diagnóstica de tres técnicas.pdf
Size:
373.83 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
Artículos de revistas