tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Biomed Res Int
. 2020 Sep 8;2020:3969868.
doi: 10.1155/2020/3969868. eCollection 2020.
Evaluation of Lateral-Flow Assay for Rapid Detection of Influenza Virus
Meng-Yi Han[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Tian-Ao Xie[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Jia-Xin Li[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Hui-Jin Chen[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Xiao-Hui Yang[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Xu-Guang Guo[SUP] 1 2 3 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
Background: Influenza virus mainly causes acute respiratory infections in humans. However, the diagnosis of influenza is not accurate based on clinical evidence, as the symptoms of flu are similar to other respiratory virus. The lateral-flow assay is a rapid method to detect influenza virus. But the effectiveness of the technique in detecting flu viruses is unclear. Hence, a meta-analysis would be performed to evaluate the accuracy of LFA in detecting influenza virus.
Methods: Relevant literature was searched out in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases with the keywords "lateral flow assay" and "flu virus". By Meta-DiSc software, pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC), and area under the curve (AUC) can be calculated.
Results: This meta-analysis contains 13 studies and 24 data. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the influenza virus detected by LFA were 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.86) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.97-0.98), respectively. The pooled values of PLR, NLR, DOR, and SROC were 32.68 (17.16-62.24), 0.17 (0.13-0.24), 334.07 (144.27-773.53), and 0.9877. No publication bias was found.
Conclusions: LFA exhibited high sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing influenza virus. It is a valuable alternative method which can diagnose influenza virus quickly. However, more evidence is required to confirm whether LFA is comparable to traditional methods for detecting the virus.
. 2020 Sep 8;2020:3969868.
doi: 10.1155/2020/3969868. eCollection 2020.
Evaluation of Lateral-Flow Assay for Rapid Detection of Influenza Virus
Meng-Yi Han[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Tian-Ao Xie[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Jia-Xin Li[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Hui-Jin Chen[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Xiao-Hui Yang[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Xu-Guang Guo[SUP] 1 2 3 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 32964030
- PMCID: PMC7495160
- DOI: 10.1155/2020/3969868
Abstract
Background: Influenza virus mainly causes acute respiratory infections in humans. However, the diagnosis of influenza is not accurate based on clinical evidence, as the symptoms of flu are similar to other respiratory virus. The lateral-flow assay is a rapid method to detect influenza virus. But the effectiveness of the technique in detecting flu viruses is unclear. Hence, a meta-analysis would be performed to evaluate the accuracy of LFA in detecting influenza virus.
Methods: Relevant literature was searched out in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases with the keywords "lateral flow assay" and "flu virus". By Meta-DiSc software, pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC), and area under the curve (AUC) can be calculated.
Results: This meta-analysis contains 13 studies and 24 data. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the influenza virus detected by LFA were 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.86) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.97-0.98), respectively. The pooled values of PLR, NLR, DOR, and SROC were 32.68 (17.16-62.24), 0.17 (0.13-0.24), 334.07 (144.27-773.53), and 0.9877. No publication bias was found.
Conclusions: LFA exhibited high sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing influenza virus. It is a valuable alternative method which can diagnose influenza virus quickly. However, more evidence is required to confirm whether LFA is comparable to traditional methods for detecting the virus.