Search

Your search keyword '"anti-igg sar-cov-2"' showing total 2 results
Start Over Descriptor "anti-igg sar-cov-2"
2 results on '"anti-igg sar-cov-2"'

1. Assessment and Comparison of Two Serological Approaches for the Surveillance of Health Workers Exposed to SARS-CoV-2

Author

Russo A, Calò F, Di Fraia A, Starace M, Minichini C, Gentile V, Angelillo IF, and Coppola N

Subjects
health workers, covid-19, sars-cov-2, anti-igg sar-cov-2, active surveillance, Infectious and parasitic diseases, RC109-216
Abstract

Antonio Russo,1 Federica Calò,1 Alessandra Di Fraia,1 Mario Starace,1 Carmine Minichini,1 Valeria Gentile,1 Italo Francesco Angelillo,2 Nicola Coppola1 On behalf of the Vanvitelli-COVID-19 Group1Department of Mental Health and Public Medicine, Section of Infectious Diseases, University of Campania, Naples, Italy; 2Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania, Naples, ItalyCorrespondence: Nicola Coppola Department of Mental Health and Public Medicine, Section of Infectious DiseasesUniversity of Campania, via: L. Armanni 5, Naples 80131, ItalyTel +39 0815666719Fax +39 0815666013Email nicola.coppola@unicampania.itBackground and Aim: The aim of the present study was to assess the diagnostic performance of an LFA compared with an ELISA test in a cohort of HWs operating in a COVID-19 unit of a teaching hospital in southern Italy.Methods: We performed an observational, prospective, interventional study including 65 COVID-19 unit personnel. On a total of 196 serum samples (at least 2 serum samples for each HW), LFA and ELISA tests for SARS-COV-2 IgG and IgM were performed. Also, 32 serum samples of SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive patients at least 21 days before sampling, and 30 serum samples of patients obtained up to November 2019, before COVID-19 outbreak in China, were used as positive and negative controls, respectively.Findings: Of the 65 HWs enrolled, 6 were positive in LFA; overall, of the 196 serum samples, 20 were positive in LFA. All ELISA tests performed on serum samples collected from HWs were negative. The specificity of LFAs was 90.77% considering the 65 HWs and 89.80% considering all the 196 health workers serum samples analyzed. Considering the data on HWs, ELISA test for SARS-COV-2 antibodies showed a specificity of 100%, including all the 196 serum samples collected, and 100% including the 65 HWs. The ELISA and LFAs performed after 21 days last COVID-19 patient was discharged were all negative.Conclusion: LFAs compared to ELISA tests result in less specificity, considering COVID-19 negative personnel and patients. Thus, LFAs seem to be not adequate in the active surveillance of HWs.Keywords: health workers, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, anti-IgG SAR-COV-2, active surveillance

Published
2020

2. Assessment and Comparison of Two Serological Approaches for the Surveillance of Health Workers Exposed to SARS-CoV-2

Author

Calò F, Di Fraia A, Starace M, Minichini C, Gentile V, Angelillo IF, Coppola N, Russo A, Calò, F, Di Fraia, A, Starace, M, Minichini, C, Gentile, V, Angelillo, If, Coppola, N, and Russo, A

Subjects
health workers, sars-cov-2, covid-19, active surveillance, lcsh:RC109-216, anti-igg sar-cov-2, lcsh:Infectious and parasitic diseases
Abstract

Antonio Russo,1 Federica Calò,1 Alessandra Di Fraia,1 Mario Starace,1 Carmine Minichini,1 Valeria Gentile,1 Italo Francesco Angelillo,2 Nicola Coppola1 On behalf of the Vanvitelli-COVID-19 Group1Department of Mental Health and Public Medicine, Section of Infectious Diseases, University of Campania, Naples, Italy; 2Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania, Naples, ItalyCorrespondence: Nicola Coppola Department of Mental Health and Public Medicine, Section of Infectious DiseasesUniversity of Campania, via: L. Armanni 5, Naples 80131, ItalyTel +39 0815666719Fax +39 0815666013Email nicola.coppola@unicampania.itBackground and Aim: The aim of the present study was to assess the diagnostic performance of an LFA compared with an ELISA test in a cohort of HWs operating in a COVID-19 unit of a teaching hospital in southern Italy.Methods: We performed an observational, prospective, interventional study including 65 COVID-19 unit personnel. On a total of 196 serum samples (at least 2 serum samples for each HW), LFA and ELISA tests for SARS-COV-2 IgG and IgM were performed. Also, 32 serum samples of SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive patients at least 21 days before sampling, and 30 serum samples of patients obtained up to November 2019, before COVID-19 outbreak in China, were used as positive and negative controls, respectively.Findings: Of the 65 HWs enrolled, 6 were positive in LFA; overall, of the 196 serum samples, 20 were positive in LFA. All ELISA tests performed on serum samples collected from HWs were negative. The specificity of LFAs was 90.77% considering the 65 HWs and 89.80% considering all the 196 health workers serum samples analyzed. Considering the data on HWs, ELISA test for SARS-COV-2 antibodies showed a specificity of 100%, including all the 196 serum samples collected, and 100% including the 65 HWs. The ELISA and LFAs performed after 21 days last COVID-19 patient was discharged were all negative.Conclusion: LFAs compared to ELISA tests result in less specificity, considering COVID-19 negative personnel and patients. Thus, LFAs seem to be not adequate in the active surveillance of HWs.Keywords: health workers, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, anti-IgG SAR-COV-2, active surveillance

Published
2020

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results