Volume 17, number 3
 PDF Downloads: 708

Comparison of Various Diagnostic Techniques Used to Identify the Presence of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin G

Ali Hazazi1*, Waleed Alomaim2*, Mohammed Almubarak1, Fawaz Albloui1, Omer  Alsaweed1, Waleed Tamimi3, Ali. A. Rabaan4, Fahad Aldakheel5, AbdulKarim  S. Bin Shaye6 and Faisal Alseraye1*

1Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Security Forces Hospital Program, P.O. Box 3643, Riyadh 11481, Saudi Arabia

2King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

3King Abdulaziz Medical City, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, King Abdullah Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

4Molecular Diagnostic Laboratory, Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.

5King Saud University, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

6Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.13005/bbra/2851

ABSTRACT: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a potentially lethal pathogen recently found to be responsible for the pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). At present PCR testing remains the standard method of diagnosing COVID-19 patients. Recently, testing for SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin was identified as a promising method of diagnosing COVID-19 and assessing an individual’s exposure to the virus. In the current study, four different techniques—CLIA, ELISA, ECLIA, and rapid testing—were used to assess the IgG antibody response in 20 patients following COVID-19 exposure. The data obtained using the CLIA and ELISA techniques illustrated that 90 percent of COVID-19 patients produced the SARS-COV-2 IgG antibody. Processing samples using the ECLIA method showed that these antibodies were present in 80 percent of all patients; however, the rapid testing technique showed that only 70 percent of patients were able to generate an immune response. The CLIA and ELISA techniques seemed to be more sensitive in terms of detecting SARS-COV-2 IgG, as they revealed that a high percentage of COVID-19 patients developed the IgG antibody. Conducting further research on the ongoing pandemic COVID-19, particularly studying antibody testing, will be valuable for diagnosing and monitoring patients.

KEYWORDS: Anti-SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Serological Testing

Download this article as: 
Copy the following to cite this article:

Hazazi A, Alomaim W, Almubarak M, Albloui F, Alsaweed O, Tamimi W, Rabaan A. A, Aldakheel F, Shaye A. S. B, Alseraye F. Comparison of Various Diagnostic Techniques Used to Identify the Presence of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin G. Biosci Biotech Res Asia 2020;17(3).

Copy the following to cite this URL:

Hazazi A, Alomaim W, Almubarak M, Albloui F, Alsaweed O, Tamimi W, Rabaan A. A, Aldakheel F, Shaye A. S. B, Alseraye F. Comparison of Various Diagnostic Techniques Used to Identify the Presence of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin G. Biosci Biotech Res Asia 2020;17(3). Available from: https://bit.ly/2SUQHU1

[ HTML Full Text]

Back to TOC