Saliva as alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR: a multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic validation study.

Autor: Tee ML; College of Medicine and Philippine General Hospital, University of the Philippines Manila, Pedro Gil Street, Ermita, 1000, Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines. mltee@up.edu.ph.; Medical Center Manila, Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines. mltee@up.edu.ph., Abrilla AA; College of Medicine and Philippine General Hospital, University of the Philippines Manila, Pedro Gil Street, Ermita, 1000, Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines., Tee CA; College of Medicine and Philippine General Hospital, University of the Philippines Manila, Pedro Gil Street, Ermita, 1000, Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines.; Medical Center Manila, Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines., Dalmacio LMM; College of Medicine and Philippine General Hospital, University of the Philippines Manila, Pedro Gil Street, Ermita, 1000, Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines., Villaflor VJP 3rd; Dagupan Doctors Villaflor Memorial Hospital, Dagupan City, Pangasinan, Philippines., Abubakar AA; Ciudad Medical Zamboanga, Zamboanga City, Zamboanga del Sur, Philippines., Tagayuna PY; Fe Del Mundo Medical Center, Quezon City, National Capital Region, Philippines., Aquino SSC; Dagupan Doctors Villaflor Memorial Hospital, Dagupan City, Pangasinan, Philippines., Bernardo VAL 6th; Dagupan Doctors Villaflor Memorial Hospital, Dagupan City, Pangasinan, Philippines., Matias RR; St. Luke's Medical Center, National Capital Region, Quezon City, Philippines.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Scientific reports [Sci Rep] 2022 Jul 23; Vol. 12 (1), pp. 12612. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Jul 23.
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-16849-1
Abstrakt: Saliva has been demonstrated as feasible alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab (NOS) for SARS-CoV-2 detection through reverse transcription quantitative/real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). This study compared the diagnostic agreement of conventional NOS, saliva with RNA extraction (SE) and saliva without RNA extraction (SalivaDirect) processing for RT-qPCR in identifying SARS-CoV-2. All techniques were also compared, as separate index tests, to a composite reference standard (CRS) where positive and negative results were defined as SARS-CoV-2 detection in either one or no sample, respectively. Of 517 paired samples, SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 150 (29.01%) NOS and 151 (29.21%) saliva specimens. The saliva-based tests were noted to have a sensitivity, specificity and accuracy (95% confidence interval) of 92.67% (87.26%, 96.28%), 97.55% (95.40%, 98.87%) and 96.13% (94.09%, 97.62%), respectively, for SE RT-qPCR and 91.33% (85.64%, 95.30%), 98.91% (97.23%, 99.70%) and 96.71% (94.79%, 98.07%), respectively, for SalivaDirect RT-qPCR compared to NOS RT-qPCR. Compared to CRS, all platforms demonstrated statistically similar diagnostic performance. These findings suggest that both conventional and streamlined saliva RT-qPCR are at least non-inferior to conventional NOS RT-qPCR in detecting SARS-CoV-2.
(© 2022. The Author(s).)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje