首页> 外文OA文献 >Comparison of Automated and Manual Nucleic Acid Extraction Methods for Detection of Enterovirus RNA
【2h】

Comparison of Automated and Manual Nucleic Acid Extraction Methods for Detection of Enterovirus RNA

机译:自动和手动核酸提取方法检测肠病毒RNA的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Automated nucleic acid extraction is an attractive alternative to labor-intensive manual methods. We compared two automated methods, the BioRobot M48 instrument (Qiagen, Inc.) and MagNA Pure (Roche Applied Sciences) methods, to two manual methods, the QIAamp Viral RNA Mini kit (Qiagen) and TRIzol (Invitrogen), for the extraction of enterovirus RNA. Analytical sensitivity was assessed by dilution analysis of poliovirus type 2 Sabin in cerebrospinal fluid. The sensitivity of PCR was equivalent after RNA extraction with QIAamp, BioRobot M48, and MagNA Pure. All 18 replicates of 100 PFU/ml were detected after extraction by the four methods. Fewer replicates of each successive dilution were detected after extraction by each method. At 10−1 PFU/ml, 17 of 18 replicates were positive by QIAamp, 15 of 18 replicates were positive by BioRobot M48, and 12 of 18 replicates were positive by MagNA Pure; at 10−2 PFU/ml, 4 of 17 replicates were positive by QIAamp, 2 of 18 replicates were positive by BioRobot M48, and 0 of 18 replicates were positive by MagNA Pure. At 10−3 PFU/ml, no replicates were detected. Evaluation of TRIzol was discontinued after nine replicates due to a trend of lower sensitivity (at 10−3 PFU/ml eight of nine replicates were positive at 100 PFU/ml, four of nine replicates were positive at 10−1 PFU/ml, and zero of nine replicates were positive at 10−2 PFU/ml). Concordant results were obtained in 24 of 28 clinical specimens after extraction by all methods. No evidence of contamination was observed after extraction by automated instruments. The data indicate that the sensitivity of enterovirus PCR is largely similar after extraction by QIAamp, BioRobot M48, and MagNA Pure; a trend of decreased sensitivity was observed after TRIzol extraction. However, the results of enterovirus PCR were largely concordant in patient samples, indicating that the four extraction methods are suitable for detection of enteroviruses in clinical specimens.
机译:自动化核酸提取是劳动密集型手动方法的一种有吸引力的替代方法。我们比较了两种自动化方法BioRobot M48仪器(Qiagen,Inc.)和MagNA Pure(Roche Applied Sciences)方法与两种手动方法QIAamp Viral RNA Mini试剂盒(Qiagen)和TRIzol(Invitrogen)的提取方法。肠病毒RNA。通过在脑脊液中对2型脊髓灰质炎病毒Sabin进行稀释分析来评估分析敏感性。用QIAamp,BioRobot M48和MagNA Pure提取RNA后,PCR的敏感性相当。通过四种方法提取后,检测到全部18个100 PFU / ml重复样品。通过每种方法提取后,检测到的每个连续稀释液的重复量都较少。在10-1 PFU / ml下,QIAamp的18个重复中的17个为阳性,BioRobot M48的18个重复中的15个为阳性,MagNA Pure的18个重复中的12个为阳性。在10-2 PFU / ml下,QIAamp的17个重复中的4个为阳性,BioRobot M48的18个重复中的2个为阳性,MagNA Pure的18个重复中的0个为阳性。在10-3 PFU / ml下,未检测到重复。由于灵敏度降低的趋势(在10-3 PFU / ml时,九个重复中的八个在100 PFU / ml下为阳性,在九个重复中的四个在10-1 PFU / ml下为阳性,对TRIzol的评估中止) 9次重复中有0次在10-2 PFU / ml时为阳性。通过所有方法提取后,在28个临床标本中的24个中获得了一致的结果。用自动仪器提取后未观察到污染迹象。数据表明,经QIAamp,BioRobot M48和MagNA Pure提取后,肠道病毒PCR的敏感性基本相似。 TRIzol提取后观察到灵敏度降低的趋势。但是,肠道病毒PCR的结果在患者样本中基本一致,表明四种提取方法适用于临床标本中肠道病毒的检测。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号