English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We conducted a multicenter evaluation of commercial and in-house PCR methods for the detection of enteroviruses. Three coded panels of test and control RNA samples, artificial clinical specimens, and representative enterovirus serotypes were used to assess amplification methods, RNA extraction methods, and reactivities with different enterovirus serotypes. Despite several differences between PCR methods, there was good agreement, although some variation in sensitivity was observed. Most PCR methods were able to detect enterovirus RNA derived from 0.01 50% tissue culture infective dose (TCID50) and were able to detect at least 1 TCID50 of enterovirus in cerebrospinal fluid, stool, or throat swab specimens. Most were also able to detect a wide range of enterovirus serotypes, although serotypic identification was not possible. Some laboratories experienced false-positive results due to PCR contamination, which appeared to result mainly from cross-contamination of specimens during RNA extraction. Provided that this problem is overcome, these PCR methods will prove to be a sensitive and rapid alternative to cell culture for the diagnosis of enterovirus infection.

Multicenter Quality Assessment of PCR Methods for Detection of Enteroviruses