Comparison of the Luminex xTAG RVP Fast Assay and the Idaho Technology FilmArray RP Assay for Detection of Respiratory Viruses in Pediatric Patients at a Cancer Hospital
Comparison of the Luminex xTAG RVP Fast Assay and the Idaho Technology FilmArray RP Assay for Detection of Respiratory Viruses in Pediatric Patients at a Cancer Hospital
复制标题
DOI：
10.1128/jcm.06186-11
复制
发表时间：
2012-07-01
影响因子：
9.4
通讯作者：
Kamboj, Mini
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Babady, N. Esther;Mead, Peter;Kamboj, Mini
呼吸道病毒越来越被认为是免疫功能低下患者发病和死亡的严重原因。呼吸道病毒的快速和敏感检测对于早期诊断和适当的抗病毒治疗以及有效实施感染控制措施至关重要。我们在纪念斯隆-凯特琳癌症中心的儿科患者中比较了两种商业检测试剂盒xTAG RVP Fast（Luminex Diagnostics，多伦多，加拿大）和FilmArray RVP（FA RVP;爱达荷州技术公司，湖城，UT）的性能。这些检测试剂可检测以下病毒：呼吸道合胞病毒;甲型和B型流感病毒;副流感病毒1、2、3和4;人偏肺病毒;腺病毒;肠道病毒-鼻病毒;冠状病毒NL 63、HKU 1、229 E和OC 43;以及博卡病毒。我们共检测了来自173名儿科患者的358份呼吸道标本，这些标本先前通过直接荧光检测（DFA）和病毒培养进行了检测。DFA/培养、xTAG RVP Fast和FA RVP的所有方法检测病毒的总体检出率（阳性标本数/总标本数）分别为24%、45%和51%。两种方法的符合率为84.5%，检出率差异有统计学意义（P < 0.0001）。总体而言，FA RVP检测试剂盒比xTAG RVP Fast检测试剂盒更灵敏，周转时间约为1 h。灵敏度、简单性和随机访问平台使FA RVP成为中低容量实验室按需服务的绝佳选择。
Respiratory viruses are increasingly recognized as serious causes of morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised patients. The rapid and sensitive detection of respiratory viruses is essential for the early diagnosis and administration of appropriate antiviral therapy, as well as for the effective implementation of infection control measures. We compared the performance of two commercial assays, xTAG RVP Fast (Luminex Diagnostics, Toronto, Canada) and FilmArray RVP (FA RVP; Idaho Technology, Salt Lake City, UT), in pediatric patients at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. These assays detect the following viruses: respiratory syncytial virus; influenza A and B viruses; parainfluenza viruses 1, 2, 3, and 4; human metapneumovirus; adenovirus; enterovirus-rhinovirus; coronaviruses NL63, HKU1, 229E, and OC43; and bocavirus. We tested a total of 358 respiratory specimens from 173 pediatric patients previously tested by direct fluorescence assay (DFA) and viral culture. The overall detection rate (number of positive specimens/total specimens) for viruses tested by all methods was 24% for DFA/culture, 45% for xTAG RVP Fast, and 51% for FA RVP. The agreement between the two multiplex assays was 84.5%, and the difference in detection rate was statistically significant (P < 0.0001). Overall, the FA RVP assay was more sensitive than the xTAG RVP Fast assay and had a turnaround time of approximately 1 h. The sensitivity, simplicity, and random-access platform make FA RVP an excellent choice for laboratory on-demand service with low to medium volume.