Pooled Analysis of the Accuracy of Xpert Ebola Assay for Diagnosing Ebola Virus Infection

Autor: Xu-Guang Guo, Zhi-Jian He, Hao Lin, Ye-Xian Zeng, Ye-Ling Liu, Ya-Ping Li, Yan-Jun Wu, Zhi-Yong Pan, Tian-Ao Xie
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2021
Předmět:
medicine.medical_specialty
Databases
Factual
Article Subject
viruses
030204 cardiovascular system & hematology
medicine.disease_cause
Sensitivity and Specificity
Likelihood ratios in diagnostic testing
General Biochemistry
Genetics and Molecular Biology
Viral hemorrhagic fever
03 medical and health sciences
Ebola Hemorrhagic Fever
0302 clinical medicine
Internal medicine
Odds Ratio
medicine
Animals
Humans
030212 general & internal medicine
Ebola virus
General Immunology and Microbiology
Receiver operating characteristic
business.industry
Area under the curve
virus diseases
General Medicine
Hemorrhagic Fever
Ebola
Reference Standards
Ebolavirus
medicine.disease
Confidence interval
Africa
Western
Molecular Diagnostic Techniques
ROC Curve
Area Under Curve
Diagnostic odds ratio
Medicine
business
Research Article
Zdroj: BioMed Research International, Vol 2021 (2021)
BioMed Research International
ISSN: 2314-6141
2314-6133
Popis: Background. West Africa has witnessed the unprecedented outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD). The Ebola virus (EBOV) can cause Ebola hemorrhagic fever, which is documented as the most deadly viral hemorrhagic fever in the world. RT-PCR had been suggested to be employed in the detection of Ebola virus; however, this method has high requirements for laboratory equipment and takes a long time to determine Ebola infection. Although Xpert Ebola is a fast and simple instrument for the detection of Ebola virus, its effect is still unclear. This study is aimed at evaluating the accuracy of Xpert Ebola in diagnosing Ebola virus infection. Methods. Using the keywords “Xpert” and “Ebola virus”, relevant studies were retrieved from the database of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane. RT-PCR was employed as a reference standard to evaluate whether the study is eligible to be included in the meta-analysis. Data from these included studies were extracted by two independent assessors and were then analyzed by the Meta-DiSc 1.4 software to produce the heterogeneity of sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SP), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic advantage ratio (DOR) of the study. The results of pooled analysis were plotted, together with the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve plotted by calculating the area under the curve (AUC). Generated pooled summary estimates (95% CIs) were calculated for the evaluation of the overall accuracy of this study. Results. Five fourfold tables were made from the four studies that were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity of Xpert Ebola was 0.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) (0.95, 0.99)), and the pooled specificity was 0.98 (95% CI (0.97, 0.99)). The pooled values of positive likelihood ratio was 53.91 (95% CI (12.82, 226.79)), with negative likelihood ratio being 0.04 (95% CI (0.02, 0.08)) and diagnostic odds ratio being 2649.45 (95% CI (629.61, 11149.02)). The AUC was 0.9961. Conclusions. Compared with RT-PCR, Xpert Ebola has high sensitivity and specificity. Therefore, it is a valued alternative method for the clinical diagnosis of Ebola virus infection. However, the Xpert Ebola test is a qualitative test that does not provide quantitative testing of EBOV concentration. Whether it can completely replace other methods or not calls for further evidences.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: