OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance of reverse transcription followed by the polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), without RNA purification, with the performance of classic protocols. STUDY DESIGN/ METHODS: Direct and classic techniques were used to test three groups of samples: six hepatitis C virus (HCV) seroconversion panels (n = 90), a HCV RNA reference panel (n = 26), and serial dilutions of four HCV-positive sera (n = 24). These methods were then applied sequentially through a clinical diagnostic algorithm to test 268 samples from high-risk patients. RESULTS: For the three groups of samples, we found a 94% concordance between direct and purified RT-PCR methods. For the detection of HCV RNA in clinical samples, sensitivity was maximized and cost minimized using both protocols according to the proposed algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: The direct PCR method is reliable, sensitive, and can result in time and cost savings. The suggested testing algorithm can enhance sensitivity and time savings for populations with a high prevalence of infection.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance of reverse transcription followed by the polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), without RNA purification, with the performance of classic protocols. STUDY DESIGN/ METHODS: Direct and classic techniques were used to test three groups of samples: six hepatitis C virus (HCV) seroconversion panels (n = 90), a HCV RNA reference panel (n = 26), and serial dilutions of four HCV-positive sera (n = 24). These methods were then applied sequentially through a clinical diagnostic algorithm to test 268 samples from high-risk patients. RESULTS: For the three groups of samples, we found a 94% concordance between direct and purified RT-PCR methods. For the detection of HCV RNA in clinical samples, sensitivity was maximized and cost minimized using both protocols according to the proposed algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: The direct PCR method is reliable, sensitive, and can result in time and cost savings. The suggested testing algorithm can enhance sensitivity and time savings for populations with a high prevalence of infection.
Authors: I Bakr; C Rekacewicz; M El Hosseiny; S Ismail; M El Daly; S El-Kafrawy; G Esmat; M A Hamid; M K Mohamed; A Fontanet Journal: Gut Date: 2006-01-24 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: K B Schwarz; M Kew; A Klein; R A Abrams; J Sitzmann; L Jones; S Sharma; R S Britton; A M Di Bisceglie; J Groopman Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Mohamed Abdel-Hamid; Mai El-Daly; Sherif El-Kafrawy; Nabiel Mikhail; G Thomas Strickland; Alan D Fix Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Fatma M Shebl; Samer S El-Kamary; Doa'a A Saleh; Mohamed Abdel-Hamid; Nabiel Mikhail; Alif Allam; Hanaa El-Arabi; Ibrahim Elhenawy; Sherif El-Kafrawy; Mai El-Daly; Sahar Selim; Ayman Abd El-Wahab; Mohamed Mostafa; Soraya Sharaf; Mohamed Hashem; Scott Heyward; O Colin Stine; Laurence S Magder; Sonia Stoszek; G Thomas Strickland Journal: J Med Virol Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 2.327
Authors: Radoslav Goldman; Habtom W Ressom; Mohamed Abdel-Hamid; Lenka Goldman; Antai Wang; Rency S Varghese; Yanming An; Christopher A Loffredo; Steven K Drake; Sohair A Eissa; Iman Gouda; Sameera Ezzat; Francoise Seillier Moiseiwitsch Journal: Carcinogenesis Date: 2007-08-27 Impact factor: 4.944