Journal of Clinical Virology Plus (Aug 2022)

Direct comparison of Altona-SARS-CoV-2 dual target RT-qPCR Assay with commercial LAMP Assay using throat washes in health care staff testing

  • Johannes Wanney,
  • Jessica Lüsebrink,
  • Gina Spölgen,
  • Sabrina Demuth,
  • Verena Schildgen,
  • Oliver Schildgen

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 2, no. 3
p. 100088

Abstract

Read online

Background: Rapid molecular diagnostics by PCR has a crucial role in handling the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. As diagnoses are time-sensitive and global supply chains are susceptible to various factors alternative detection methods would be an important backup. Objectives: During the study the performance of a commercially available isothermal LAMP method for SARS-CoV-2 detection was compared to a IVD RT-PCR Assays using throat wash specimens that were routinely taken in our hospital setting. Study design: Throat wash specimens of hospital staff (n = 174) previously tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by the Altona Diagnostics RealStar SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR (Altona Diagnostics, Hamburg, Germany) was tested for SARS-CoV-2 also by the SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Colorimetric LAMP Assay (NEB Germany GmbH, Frankfurt a.M., Germany). Results: The sensitivity of the colorimetric LAMP Assay compared to RT-qPCR was 78.74%, and the specificity was determined to 88.24% with a positive predictive value of 0.986 and a negative predicitve value of 0.882. The positive and negative likelihood ratio for LAMP was 6.693 and 0.241, respectively, while the diagnostic odds ratio was 27.77. Conclusions: In times of limited PCR test ressources and in settings with limited PCR capacities, the colorimetric LAMP Assay could serve as an alternative, if a calculable loss of sensitivity is acceptable from the Public Health perspective in certain settings.