Posterior Oropharyngeal Saliva for the Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).
COVID-19
mass screening
pandemic
saliva
severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
Journal
Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America
ISSN: 1537-6591
Titre abrégé: Clin Infect Dis
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9203213
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 12 2020
31 12 2020
Historique:
received:
13
05
2020
accepted:
19
06
2020
pubmed:
21
6
2020
medline:
7
1
2021
entrez:
21
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put tremendous pressure on the healthcare system worldwide. Diagnostic testing remained one of the limiting factors for early identification and isolation of infected patients. This study aimed to evaluate posterior oropharyngeal saliva (POPS) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection among patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19. The laboratory information system was searched retrospectively for all respiratory specimens and POPS requested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection between 1 February 2020 and 15 April 2020. The agreement and diagnostic performance of POPS against NPsp were evaluated. A total of 13772 specimens were identified during the study period, including 2130 POPS and 8438 nasopharyngeal specimens (NPsp). Two hundred and twenty-nine same-day POPS-NPsp paired were identified with POPS and NPsp positivity of 61.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 55.1-67.6%) and 53.3% (95% CI 46.8-59.6%). The overall, negative and positive percent agreement were 76.0% (95% CI 70.2-80.9%), 65.4% (95% CI 55.5-74.2%), 85.2% (95% CI 77.4-90.8%). Better positive percent agreement was observed in POPS-NPsp obtained within 7 days (96.6%, 95% CI 87.3-99.4%) compared with after 7 days of symptom onset (75.0%, 95% CI 61.4-85.2%). Among the 104 positive pairs, the mean difference in Cp value was 0.26 (range: 12.63 to -14.74), with an overall higher Cp value in NPsp (Pearson coefficient 0.579). No significant temporal variation was noted between the 2 specimen types. POPS is an acceptable alternative specimen to nasopharyngeal specimen for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put tremendous pressure on the healthcare system worldwide. Diagnostic testing remained one of the limiting factors for early identification and isolation of infected patients. This study aimed to evaluate posterior oropharyngeal saliva (POPS) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection among patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19.
METHODS
The laboratory information system was searched retrospectively for all respiratory specimens and POPS requested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection between 1 February 2020 and 15 April 2020. The agreement and diagnostic performance of POPS against NPsp were evaluated.
RESULTS
A total of 13772 specimens were identified during the study period, including 2130 POPS and 8438 nasopharyngeal specimens (NPsp). Two hundred and twenty-nine same-day POPS-NPsp paired were identified with POPS and NPsp positivity of 61.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 55.1-67.6%) and 53.3% (95% CI 46.8-59.6%). The overall, negative and positive percent agreement were 76.0% (95% CI 70.2-80.9%), 65.4% (95% CI 55.5-74.2%), 85.2% (95% CI 77.4-90.8%). Better positive percent agreement was observed in POPS-NPsp obtained within 7 days (96.6%, 95% CI 87.3-99.4%) compared with after 7 days of symptom onset (75.0%, 95% CI 61.4-85.2%). Among the 104 positive pairs, the mean difference in Cp value was 0.26 (range: 12.63 to -14.74), with an overall higher Cp value in NPsp (Pearson coefficient 0.579). No significant temporal variation was noted between the 2 specimen types.
CONCLUSIONS
POPS is an acceptable alternative specimen to nasopharyngeal specimen for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32562544
pii: 5860439
doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa797
pmc: PMC7337706
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2939-2946Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Références
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019 Mar;25(3):372-378
pubmed: 29906597
N Engl J Med. 2020 May 28;382(22):e76
pubmed: 32302471
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Jul 23;58(8):
pubmed: 32317257
Nature. 2020 May;581(7809):465-469
pubmed: 32235945
J Infect. 2020 Jul;81(1):e45-e50
pubmed: 32298676
Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 May;20(5):565-574
pubmed: 32213337
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2018 Dec 12;32(1):
pubmed: 30541871
Clin Infect Dis. 2008 Apr 1;46(7):e61-4
pubmed: 18444806
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Dec 28;55(1):226-233
pubmed: 27807150
J Virol Methods. 2017 May;243:15-19
pubmed: 28111058
Emerg Microbes Infect. 2017 Jun 7;6(6):e49
pubmed: 28588283
J Virol. 2011 Apr;85(8):4025-30
pubmed: 21289121
Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Jul 28;71(15):841-843
pubmed: 32047895
JAMA. 2020 May 12;323(18):1843-1844
pubmed: 32159775
Int J Oral Sci. 2020 Feb 24;12(1):8
pubmed: 32094336