Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 7, 2025
Author Spotlight: Advancements in Multiplex Detection of Respiratory Viruses
Published on: November 10, 2023
Comparison between five PCR techniques for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2
A Tenorio-Abreu1, A Ruiz-Castillo, A F Guzmán-González
1Alberto Tenorio-Abreu. UGC Microbiología Hospital Universitario Juan Ramón Jiménez. Ronda Exterior Norte s/n, 21005 Huelva. Spain. albeteno@hotmail.com.
Objective:
Since the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 appeared, there have been numerous techniques that have been developed for the diagnosis or monitoring of infection, both direct and serological techniques. Choosing a good diagnostic tool is essential for epidemiological control. The objective was to compare five commercialized RT-PCR techniques in real time, in sensitivity, specificity and agreement for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Methods:
Five commercial RT-PCR kits for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 were compared. Eight known positive samples were taken and subjected to seven different dilutions or concentrations, and another 135 negative samples were used to determine sensitivity, specificity, and agreement values.
Results:
The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for the Palex, Roche and GeneXpert techniques with respect to Seegene were identical, corresponding to 98.21%, 100%, 100% and 99.26% respectively. For Becton Dickinson the sensitivity was 89.28%, the specificity of 100%, the PPV of 100% and the NPV of 95.74%. The agreement using the Kappa index for Palex, Roche and GeneXpert was 0.9892, while the agreement for Becton Dickinson was with a Kappa index of 0.9215.
Conclusions:
All commercial RT-PCR kits had high sensitivities and specificities, as well as PPV, NPV, and concordance.
