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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Objective. To describe the molecular tests used since 2008 for detection of Zika virus reported in indexed articles in 3 databases. Methods. A search of scientific literature was made using the PRISMA method during 2008 period – February 2018, in the databases Pubmed, Science Direct and Embase, using as inclusion criteria original articles published between 2008 to 2018 that make researches in humans with suspicion of ZIKV infection and that describes the use of molecular test. Results. From an initial search of 2617 articles recollected with the keywords and after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 18 articles were selected, of which 8 are from Science Direct, 4 from Embase and 6 from Pubmed. The RT- PCR was described as the most used technique, it was found 9 different molecular targets used in the tests and 7 biological samples of which the viral genome can be amplified. Conclusions. Until now the RT-PCR test is the most used technique for the diagnosis of infection for Zika virus, being the most standardized test and due it presents a high sensitivity and specificity, however there is still working about other techniques that guarantee opportune detection of the virus, using different genes like E, NS5, NS1, NS2B, NS3, NS4B y CPREM mainly in serum and urine.

Descripción de pruebas moleculares en el diagnóstico del virus Zika en el periodo 2008-Febrero 2018. Revisión sistemática