Salivary detection of COVID-19: clinical performance of oral sponge sampling for SARS-CoV-2 testing.
Journal
ERJ open research
ISSN: 2312-0541
Titre abrégé: ERJ Open Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101671641
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2021
Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
16
06
2021
accepted:
17
09
2021
entrez:
8
12
2021
pubmed:
9
12
2021
medline:
9
12
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The current diagnostic standard for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing with nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs. The invasiveness and need for trained personnel make the NP technique unsuited for repeated community-based mass screening. We developed a technique to collect saliva in a simple and easy way with the sponges that are usually used for tamponade of epistaxis. This study was carried out to validate the clinical performance of oral sponge (OS) sampling for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. Over a period of 22 weeks, we collected prospectively 409 paired NP and OS samples from consecutive subjects presenting to a public community-based free screening centre. Subjects were referred by their attending physician because of recent COVID-19 symptoms (n = 147) or by the contact tracing staff of the French public health insurance because they were considered as close contacts of a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 case (n = 262). In symptomatic subjects, RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 testing with OS showed a 96.5% (95% CI: 89.6-94.8) concordance with NP testing, and a 93.2% (95% CI: 89.1-97.3) sensitivity when using the IdyllaTM platform and a sensitivity of 76.3% (95% CI: 69.4-83.2) on the Synlab Barla laboratory platform. In close contacts the NP-OS concordance (93.8%, 95% CI: 90.9-96.7) and OS sensitivity (71.9%, 95% CI: 66.5-77.3) were slightly lower. These results strongly suggest that OS testing is a straightforward, low-cost and high-throughput sampling method that can be used for frequent RT-PCR testing of COVID-19 patients and mass screening of populations.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The current diagnostic standard for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing with nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs. The invasiveness and need for trained personnel make the NP technique unsuited for repeated community-based mass screening. We developed a technique to collect saliva in a simple and easy way with the sponges that are usually used for tamponade of epistaxis. This study was carried out to validate the clinical performance of oral sponge (OS) sampling for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing.
METHODS
METHODS
Over a period of 22 weeks, we collected prospectively 409 paired NP and OS samples from consecutive subjects presenting to a public community-based free screening centre. Subjects were referred by their attending physician because of recent COVID-19 symptoms (n = 147) or by the contact tracing staff of the French public health insurance because they were considered as close contacts of a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 case (n = 262).
RESULTS
RESULTS
In symptomatic subjects, RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 testing with OS showed a 96.5% (95% CI: 89.6-94.8) concordance with NP testing, and a 93.2% (95% CI: 89.1-97.3) sensitivity when using the IdyllaTM platform and a sensitivity of 76.3% (95% CI: 69.4-83.2) on the Synlab Barla laboratory platform. In close contacts the NP-OS concordance (93.8%, 95% CI: 90.9-96.7) and OS sensitivity (71.9%, 95% CI: 66.5-77.3) were slightly lower.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
These results strongly suggest that OS testing is a straightforward, low-cost and high-throughput sampling method that can be used for frequent RT-PCR testing of COVID-19 patients and mass screening of populations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34877351
doi: 10.1183/23120541.00396-2021
pii: 00396-2021
pmc: PMC8474486
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Informations de copyright
Copyright ©The authors 2021.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Provenance: Submitted article, peer reviewed. Conflict of interest: J. Boutros has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Benzaquen has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C.H. Marquette has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Ilié has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Labaky has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Benchetrit has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T. Lavrut has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S. Leroy has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Chemla has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Carles has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: V. Tanga has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C. Maniel has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: O. Bordone has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Allégra has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: V. Lespinet has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Fayada has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Griffonnet has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: V. Hofman has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: P. Hofman is a member of the scientific advisory board (group of European experts) of Biocartis; however, this board is totally independent of Biocartis.
Références
J Infect Dis. 2020 Oct 13;222(10):1612-1619
pubmed: 32738137
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Aug 2;73(3):e559-e565
pubmed: 32976596
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2021 Mar;19(3):171-183
pubmed: 33057203
Cell. 2020 May 28;181(5):1016-1035.e19
pubmed: 32413319
Med. 2021 Mar 12;2(3):263-280.e6
pubmed: 33521748
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Feb 1;72(3):482-485
pubmed: 33527126
Infect Drug Resist. 2020 Oct 01;13:3393-3399
pubmed: 33061486
Immunology. 2010 Jun;130(2):254-61
pubmed: 20406307
N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 19;382(12):1177-1179
pubmed: 32074444
Ann Transl Med. 2021 Jun;9(11):921
pubmed: 34350236
J Virol. 2011 Apr;85(8):4025-30
pubmed: 21289121
Biopreserv Biobank. 2020 Dec;18(6):517-524
pubmed: 33175565
Nat Med. 2020 May;26(5):681-687
pubmed: 32327758
Ann Intern Med. 2021 Jan;174(1):131-133
pubmed: 32857591
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020 Dec 15;202(12):1636-1645
pubmed: 32726565
N Engl J Med. 2020 Nov 26;383(22):e120
pubmed: 32997903
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 10;15(12):e0242958
pubmed: 33301459
JAMA Intern Med. 2021 Mar 1;181(3):353-360
pubmed: 33449069
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Aug 18;173(4):262-267
pubmed: 32422057
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2021 Jan;40(1):193-195
pubmed: 32666481
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020 Apr 24;6(2):e19054
pubmed: 32310815
Viruses. 2020 Nov 17;12(11):
pubmed: 33212817
PLoS One. 2021 Jun 10;16(6):e0253007
pubmed: 34111196
Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Jun 16;:
pubmed: 32556191
Int J Oral Sci. 2020 Feb 24;12(1):8
pubmed: 32094336
J Clin Microbiol. 2021 Feb 18;59(3):
pubmed: 33262219
J Clin Microbiol. 2021 Mar 19;59(4):
pubmed: 33514627
Int J Infect Dis. 2020 May;94:107-109
pubmed: 32315809