Scholarlink

<p>This study evaluated four commercial viral RNA extraction protocols using samples inactivated with TRIzol®, aiming to detect Senecavirus A (SV-A) and Classical Swine Fever Virus (CSFV). The tested kits were: RNeasy® (Qiagen), IndiSpin (Indical), Aurum (BioRad), and Direct-zol (Zymo), which were compared to the traditional method with Tri Reagent (Sigma). The analyses were based on the sensitivity and speed of extractions in a routine laboratory setting. The results showed that adaptations in the protocols can increase detection sensitivity. Clinical samples were processed using different protocol variations, with RNeasy® demonstrating notable performance, including samples collected using GenoTube®, which suggests its viability for field molecular diagnosis. The study concludes that, although TRIzol® is effective, alternative methods offer practicality, shorter extraction time, and equivalent or superior sensitivity, especially in clinical samples.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparison of Viral RNA Extraction Protocols for Senecavirus A and Classical Swine Fever Virus

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月16日

查看全文
  • Antônio Augusto Fonseca Júnior,
  • Mateus Laguardia-Nascimento,
  • Aline Aparecida Silva Barbosa,
  • Valdenia Lopes da Silva Gonçalves,
  • Carla do Amaral Pinto,
  • Tânia Rosária Pereira Freitas,
  • Anselmo Vasconcelos Rivetti Júnior,
  • Marcelo Fernandes Camargos

摘要

This study evaluated four commercial viral RNA extraction protocols using samples inactivated with TRIzol®, aiming to detect Senecavirus A (SV-A) and Classical Swine Fever Virus (CSFV). The tested kits were: RNeasy® (Qiagen), IndiSpin (Indical), Aurum (BioRad), and Direct-zol (Zymo), which were compared to the traditional method with Tri Reagent (Sigma). The analyses were based on the sensitivity and speed of extractions in a routine laboratory setting. The results showed that adaptations in the protocols can increase detection sensitivity. Clinical samples were processed using different protocol variations, with RNeasy® demonstrating notable performance, including samples collected using GenoTube®, which suggests its viability for field molecular diagnosis. The study concludes that, although TRIzol® is effective, alternative methods offer practicality, shorter extraction time, and equivalent or superior sensitivity, especially in clinical samples.