Tweet
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2017 Feb 2. pii: S0732-8893(17)30034-2. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2017.01.015. [Epub ahead of print]
Necessity to critically review the automatic results of the Xpert Flu assay.
Engelmann I1, Alidjinou EK2, Lazrek M2, Dewilde A2, Hober D2.
Author information
Abstract
While using the Xpert Flu assay we became aware of false-negative results. The study aimed to analyze the causes of these false-negative results. One hundred fifty-nine respiratory specimens were tested in the Xpert Flu assay and in multiplex reverse transcription-polymerase chain reactions (RT-PCRs) for respiratory viruses. Discordant specimens were tested in the Influenza A/B r-gene assay. One hundred fifty-two (96%) and 151 (95%) specimens yielded concordant results for influenza A and B, respectively. Fifteen specimens tested negative in the Xpert Flu assay and positive in a multiplex RT-PCR. Positive results were confirmed for 12 of these specimens in the Influenza A/B r-gene assay. Xpert Flu assay amplification curves and endpoints suggested that the false-negative results were mainly due to erroneous automatic result interpretation. We report false-negative results of the Xpert Flu assay due to erroneous automatic result interpretation. Careful analysis of amplification curves and endpoints is needed to avoid reporting of false-negative results.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
KEYWORDS:
Discordance; Flu; Influenza; Molecular diagnostic techniques; PCR; Point-of-care
PMID: 28214222 DOI: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2017.01.015
[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
Necessity to critically review the automatic results of the Xpert Flu assay.
Engelmann I1, Alidjinou EK2, Lazrek M2, Dewilde A2, Hober D2.
Author information
Abstract
While using the Xpert Flu assay we became aware of false-negative results. The study aimed to analyze the causes of these false-negative results. One hundred fifty-nine respiratory specimens were tested in the Xpert Flu assay and in multiplex reverse transcription-polymerase chain reactions (RT-PCRs) for respiratory viruses. Discordant specimens were tested in the Influenza A/B r-gene assay. One hundred fifty-two (96%) and 151 (95%) specimens yielded concordant results for influenza A and B, respectively. Fifteen specimens tested negative in the Xpert Flu assay and positive in a multiplex RT-PCR. Positive results were confirmed for 12 of these specimens in the Influenza A/B r-gene assay. Xpert Flu assay amplification curves and endpoints suggested that the false-negative results were mainly due to erroneous automatic result interpretation. We report false-negative results of the Xpert Flu assay due to erroneous automatic result interpretation. Careful analysis of amplification curves and endpoints is needed to avoid reporting of false-negative results.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
KEYWORDS:
Discordance; Flu; Influenza; Molecular diagnostic techniques; PCR; Point-of-care
PMID: 28214222 DOI: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2017.01.015
[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]