Diagnostic accuracy of nasopharyngeal swab, nasal swab and saliva swab samples for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR

Autor:	Masao Hashimoto, Hiroshi Takumida, Yusaku Kusaba, Ataru Moriya, Keita Sakamoto, Moto Kimura, Jin Takasaki, Takashi Katsuno, Shinyu Izumi, Masayuki Hojo, Akinari Tsukada, Kazuki Kawajiri, Yoh Yamaguchi, Hiromu Watanabe, Chie Morita, Ayano Motohashi, Momoko Morishita, Kazuo Hakkaku, Haruhito Sugiyama, Manabu Suzuki, Tohru Miyoshi-Akiyama, Susumu Saito, Yoshie Tsujimoto, Junko Terada
Rok vydání:	2021
Předmět:	0301 basic medicine Microbiology (medical) Saliva Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) 030106 microbiology Diagnostic accuracy medicine.disease_cause Specimen Handling 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Nasopharynx medicine Humans 030212 general & internal medicine Coronavirus saliva General Immunology and Microbiology nasal swab business.industry Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction SARS-CoV-2 COVID-19 General Medicine Gold standard (test) Virology nasopharyngeal swab Infectious Diseases Real-time polymerase chain reaction COVID-19 diagnostic test Nasal Swab Original Article business Research Article
Zdroj:	Infectious Diseases (London, England) article-version (VoR) Version of Record
ISSN:	2374-4243
Popis:	Background The current gold standard in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) diagnostics is the real-time reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA in nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) samples. Alternatively, nasal swab (NS) or saliva swab (SS) specimens are used, although available data on test accuracy are limited. We examined the diagnostic accuracy of NPS/NS/SS samples for this purpose. Methods Ten patients were included after being tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR in NPS samples according to the National Institute of Infectious Disease guidelines. In comparison with this conventional diagnostic method, NPS/NS/SS samples were tested using the cobas 6800 systems RT-PCR device. To investigate the usefulness of the cobas method and the difference among sample types, the agreement and sensitivity were calculated. Five to six samples were collected over a total period of 5–6 d from each patient. Results Fifty-seven sets of NPS/NS/SS samples were collected, of which 40 tested positive for COVID-19 by the conventional method. Overall, the concordance rates using the conventional method were 86.0%/70.2%/54.4% for NPS/NS/SS samples (cobas); however, for samples collected up to and including on Day 9 after disease onset (22 negative and one positive specimens), the corresponding rates were 95.7%/87.0%/65.2%. The overall sensitivity estimates were 100.0%/67.5%/37.5% for NPS/NS/SS samples (cobas). For samples up to 9 d after onset, the corresponding values were 100.0%/86.4%/63.6%. Conclusions NS samples are more reliable than SS samples and can be an alternative to NPS samples. They can be a useful diagnostic method in the future.
Databáze:	OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz:	https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_dedup___::3fff2021e6cb563c2ee1a54d805592b3 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33760699 Zobrazit plný text záznamu Plný text ve formátu PDF Plný text ve formátu HTML
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje	K zobrazení výsledku je třeba se přihlásit.