Abstract
BackgroundThe efficiency of isolation and purification of the viral genome is a critical step to the accuracy and reliability of RT-qPCR to detect SARS-CoV-2. However, COVID-19 testing laboratories were overwhelmed by a surge in diagnostic demand that affected supply chains especially in low and middle-income facilities. ObjectivesThus, this study compares the performance of alternative methods to extraction and purification of viral RNA in samples of patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Study designNasopharyngeal swabs were submitted to three in-house protocols and three commercial methods; viral genome was detected using the primer-probe (N1 and N2) described by CDC and viral load of samples were determined. ResultsThe in-house protocols resulted in detection of virus in 82.4 to 86.3% of samples and commercial methods in 94.1 to 98%. The disagreement results were observed in samples with low viral load or below the estimated limit of detection of RT-qPCR. ConclusionThe simplified methods proposed might be less reliable for patients with low viral load and alternative commercial methods showed comparable performance.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
