Table 1.
The comparison of the performances among conventional static ELISA, immunochromatography, electrochemiluminescence, and our RF-ELISA.
| Methods | Performances |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volume consumption of sample | Time consumption of detection | Flow manner | LOQ (g/mL) | Cost | POCT potential | |
| Our RF-ELISA | 30–50 μL | 4–5 min | Reciprocating-flowing | ~4 E-12 | Low | High |
| Conventional static ELISA | 100–300 μL | >40 min | Static | ~1.0 E-9 | Low | Low |
| Immuno-chromatography | 30–70 μL | 10–15 min | Flow-through | ~1.0 E-9 | Low | High |
| Electro- chemiluminescence | 100–300 μL | <20 min | Static or flow-through | >1.0 E-15 | High | Low |