Table 3.

Comparison of different methods

Ref.	Year of publication	Comparison between	Remarks
Hochberger et al[75]	2006	Automated COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan system (real time PCR) and Versant HBV 3.0	Good correlation between two
Juman Awadh et al[76]	2008	Versant HBV 3.0 (Bayer, branched DNA mediated assay) and Biotitre B (real time PCR variant)	Both were highly specific, though reproducibility of Versant HBV 3.0 was higher
Yang et al[77]	2009	Real Art HBV PCR Kit (Abbott, real time PCR) and Versant bDNA 3.0	Abbott's kit was more sn, detection limit 27 IU/mL
Louisirirotchanakul et al[78]	2010	fully automated ElecsysHBsAg II assay, Architect, AxSYM and Advia Centaur HBsAg assays	The later 2 tests appeared less sensitive in detecting early HBV infection
Berger et al[79]	2010	CAP/CTM assay v2.0 and v1.0	Comparable results for all 278 tested samples
Lunel-Fabiani et al[80]	2010	Access immunoassay system from Beckman coulter with Abbott AxSYM and PRISM HBsAg assays; VIDAS was used to conclude discrepant results	Sn: 100%, Sp: 99.96%
Caliendo et al[81]	2011	Abbott RealTime HBV IUO, the Roche CAP/CTM HBV test, the Roche CobasTaqMan HBV test with HighPure system, and the Qiagen artus HBV TM ASR	Limit of detection of artus 1.5 log(10) IU/mL, of other 3 tests 1.0 log(10) IU/mL
Ismail et al[82]	2011	Abbott HBV real-time PCR (Abbott PCR), artus HBV real-time PCR with QIAamp DNA blood kit purification (artus-DB), and artus HBV real-time PCR with the QIAamp DSP virus kit purification (artus-DSP)	Lower limit of detection against WHO standards were 1.43, 82 and 9 IU/mL respectively
Yeh et al[83]	2014	Abbott real time HBV (RealTime assay) and CAP/CTM HBV assays 2.0 (TaqMan assay)	Real time assay's Sn: 98.2%, Sp: 100%. Good level of agreement between the two

PCR: Polymerase chain reaction; Sn: Sensitivity; Sp: Specificity; WHO: World Health Organization; v2.0: Version 2.0; CAP/CTM: CobasAmpliPrep/CobasTaqMan; HBV: Hepatitis B virus; bDNA: Branched DNA; HBsAg: Hepatitis B surface antigen.