Item request has been placed!
×
Item request cannot be made.
×
Processing Request
Prospective Evaluation of Xpert® Xpress Strep A Automated PCR Assay vs. Solana® Group A Streptococcal Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing vs. Conventional Throat Culture.
Item request has been placed!
×
Item request cannot be made.
×
Processing Request
- Additional Information
- Subject Terms:
- Abstract:
In our laboratory, the negative rapid group A streptococcal (GAS) antigen assays are backed up by the Solana® GAS Assay by Quidel instead of a Group A streptococcal throat culture. Another FDA cleared RT-PCR assay is the Xpert® Xpress Strep A, which detects Streptococcus pyogenes DNA, and is performed on the Cepheid GeneXpert instrument. Three hundred seventy-five positive and negative specimens were randomly selected from 5489 throat specimens that had been tested by the Solana® GAS Assay during January 2018 and were tested with the Xpress Strep A assay. A throat culture was also set up (sheep blood agar at 35 °C in 5% CO2). All beta-hemolytic streptococci were purified and identified by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry. Of the 375 samples, 185 were positive by Solana® GAS Assay, and 187 were positive by the Xpress Strep A. The total agreement between the Solana® GAS Assay and the Xpert® Xpress Strep A was 99.5%. The agreement of the Xpert® Xpress Strep A assay with culture was 90.1%. The sensitivity and specificity for Xpress Strep A versus culture were 100% and 83.5%, respectively. The Xpert® Xpress Strep A assay's performance was equivalent to the Solana® GAS Assay, and was highly sensitive. The lower specificity was likely due to the Xpress Strep A assay having higher sensitivity as compared to throat culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Abstract:
Copyright of Current Microbiology is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
No Comments.