Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2010
Evaluation of the use of real-time PCR for human T cell lymphotropic virus 1 and 2 as a confirmatory test in screening for blood donors.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Andrade Rafaela Gomes, Ribeiro Maísa Aparecida, Namen-Lopes Maria Sueli Silva, Silva Sônia Mara Nunes, Basques Fernando Valadares, Ribas João Gabriel, Carneiro-Proietti Anna Bárbara de Freitas, Martins Marina Lobato
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: HTLV-1/2 screening among blood donors commonly utilizes an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (EIA), followed by a confirmatory method such as Western blot (WB) if the EIA is positive. However, this algorithm yields a high rate of inconclusive results, and is expensive.
METHODS: Two qualitative real-time PCR assays were developed to detect HTLV-1 and 2, and a total of 318 samples were tested (152 blood donors, 108 asymptomatic carriers, 26 HAM/TSP patients and 30 seronegative individuals).
RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of PCR in comparison with WB results were 99.4% and 98.5%, respectively. PCR tests were more efficient for identifying the virus type, detecting HTLV-2 infection and defining inconclusive cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Because real-time PCR is sensitive and practical and costs much less than WB, this technique can be used as a confirmatory test for HTLV in blood banks, as a replacement for WB.
METHODS: Two qualitative real-time PCR assays were developed to detect HTLV-1 and 2, and a total of 318 samples were tested (152 blood donors, 108 asymptomatic carriers, 26 HAM/TSP patients and 30 seronegative individuals).
RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of PCR in comparison with WB results were 99.4% and 98.5%, respectively. PCR tests were more efficient for identifying the virus type, detecting HTLV-2 infection and defining inconclusive cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Because real-time PCR is sensitive and practical and costs much less than WB, this technique can be used as a confirmatory test for HTLV in blood banks, as a replacement for WB.