comparison of pcr test accuracy with laboratory data and ct scan in covid-19:a systematic review

Background: given the novelty of covid-19, reviewing diagnostic methods can be of great help to community health policymakers. considering the importance of diagnosing covid-19 and the need for reducing the number of false positive and false negative cases that appear to be different in various diagnostic methods, this systematic review aimed at comparison of pcr test accuracy with laboratory data and ct scan in covid-19. methods: in this systematic review, embase (elsevier, 2018), medline (national library of medicine, 2018), scopus, proquest, web of science (clarivate analytics, 2018b), and google scholar data bases were searched for the studies published prior to 3 april 2020. based on the inclusion criteria, 20 out of 859 primarily screened studies were finally assessed. results: the results indicated that the laboratory diagnosis of viral nucleic acid could have false-negative results, and serological testing of virus-specific igg and igm antibodies should be used as an option for diagnosis. moreover, chest computerized tomography (ct) was found to be more sensitive in comparison to reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rt-pcr) (98% vs. 71%). hence, the articles offered the combined use of chest ct, sars-cov-2 rt-pcr, and multiplex pcr. conclusion: follow-up rt-pcr and chest ct are necessary in covid-19. in addition, serological testing of virus-specific igg and igm antibodies along with laboratory diagnosis of viral nucleic acid can lead to the highly sensitive and accurate diagnosis. moreover, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (elisa) is one of the cost-effective methods in epidemic conditions in low- and middle-income countries.