Literature DB >> 32389132

Pharynx gargle samples are suitable for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic use and save personal protective equipment and swabs.

Monika Malecki1, Jessica Lüsebrink2, Stefanie Teves1, Andreas F Wendel1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32389132      PMCID: PMC7239771          DOI: 10.1017/ice.2020.229

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol        ISSN: 0899-823X            Impact factor:   3.254


× No keyword cloud information.
To the Editor—First described in China in December 2019, novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has spread globally. Europe is now an epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic. To bring the epidemic under control, laboratory testing for SARS-CoV-2 is essential to diagnose and isolate infected people and subsequently trace their contacts. Public health agencies recommend rapid initial testing by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) from upper respiratory (nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal) specimens in ambulatory patients.[1,2] SARS-CoV-2 replicates in the throat and the lung, and throat samples have a sufficient sensitivity in the first episode of the disease.[3] However, healthcare workers (HCWs) obtaining the swab must wear personal protective equipment (PPE set: respirator, eye protection, gloves and gowns) because coughing might be induced by triggering the gag reflex of the person to be sampled. In this pandemic, a foreseeable shortage of PPE and an acute lack of flocked swabs occurred in our hospital. Hence, we decided to collect pharynx gargle samples as an upper respiratory tract specimen (also known as oral rinse or throat wash in the literature). Pharynx gargle specimens can be obtained without close contact between the patient and the healthcare worker. Furthermore, pharynx gargle samples are easy to collect and sample the same anatomic region as throat swabs. Pharynx gargle samples are also an established method for the molecular detection of common respiratory infections, as well as in children.[4,5] However, to our knowledge, only a few studies have assessed this type of specimen for the diagnosis of viral respiratory diseases. Bennet et al[5,6] demonstrated that gargle samples were more sensitive in the detection of viral respiratory pathogens, and some evidence shows that gargle samples are suitable for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.[6,7] Saliva collected by gargling has already been investigated for determining the viral load of SARS-CoV-2.[8] In addition, gargle samples were successfully used in the first SARS epidemic for RNA detection and antigen testing.[9,10] In March 2020, during the preparations for the first wave of infections, we installed examination units for HCWs in all 3 hospitals of our institution. HCWs were asked to come to the desk if they showed respiratory symptoms or if they had unprotected contact to a COVID-19 patient or SARS-CoV-2–positive HCW. We established the following workflow: The HCW approaches the desk, where a Plexiglas pane has been installed, and keeps a distance of at least 1.5 m. When symptomatic, the HCW wears a face mask. If a test is deemed necessary, he or she is instructed to provide a pharynx gargle sample in an empty room nearby equipped with a test kit (specimen container, 10 mL normal saline). After sampling (gargling time, 10–30 s), the closed container is left in the room. The throat wash is quickly transferred to a biosafety 2 laboratory and is subjected to a reverse transcription PCR for SARS-CoV-2 detection (RealStar SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Kit, Altona Diagnostics, Germany). On a regular basis, windows are opened in the sampling room, and contact sites are disinfected after each visit. During the whole procedure, no additional special PPE or swabs are needed. From mid-March until April 20, 924 HCWs were tested at least once, and 26 samples were positive (2.8 %). Due to the limited number of PCR reagents and swabs, we examined only a very limited number (n = 5) of paired specimens (throat swab and gargle sample taken within 24 hours) in our hospital. We have observed 1 discrepant result (ie, throat swab negative and gargle sample positive) so far. At the same time, we saved at least 225 PPE sets (conservative calculation of 3 sets per day and per hospital over a period of 25 work days) and 1,000 swabs. Of course, this approach can only be used if the person being tested is able to gargle. Patients from whom a gargle sample cannot be obtained (eg, dysphagia, dementia or infants) should be swabbed. Gargle samples might only be manageable for laboratories if there are low numbers of specimens. The gargle sample container is bigger than a swab; thus, it might cause problems with packaging or take too much space in a safety cabinet. Finally, in some countries national guidelines do not allow gargle sampling. In conclusion, self-collected gargle samples are easy to take, noninvasive, material saving, and safe for healthcare workers. Nevertheless, more preanalytic data and comparative studies are needed at different stages of COVID-19.
  15 in total

1.  Prevalence of RT-qPCR-detected SARS-CoV-2 infection at schools: First results from the Austrian School-SARS-CoV-2 prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Peter Willeit; Robert Krause; Bernd Lamprecht; Andrea Berghold; Buck Hanson; Evelyn Stelzl; Heribert Stoiber; Johannes Zuber; Robert Heinen; Alwin Köhler; David Bernhard; Wegene Borena; Christian Doppler; Dorothee von Laer; Hannes Schmidt; Johannes Pröll; Ivo Steinmetz; Michael Wagner
Journal:  Lancet Reg Health Eur       Date:  2021-03-23

Review 2.  Tools and Techniques for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)/COVID-19 Detection.

Authors:  Seyed Hamid Safiabadi Tali; Jason J LeBlanc; Zubi Sadiq; Oyejide Damilola Oyewunmi; Carolina Camargo; Bahareh Nikpour; Narges Armanfard; Selena M Sagan; Sana Jahanshahi-Anbuhi
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 26.132

3.  Limits and Opportunities of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Tests: An Experienced-Based Perspective.

Authors:  Verena Schildgen; Sabrina Demuth; Jessica Lüsebrink; Oliver Schildgen
Journal:  Pathogens       Date:  2021-01-05

4.  Gargle lavage as a viable alternative to swab for detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Authors:  Ankit Mittal; Ankesh Gupta; Shiv Kumar; Milan Surjit; Binit Singh; Manish Soneja; Kapil Dev Soni; Adil Rashid Khan; Komal Singh; Shivdas Naik; Arvind Kumar; Richa Aggarwal; Neeraj Nischal; Sanjeev Sinha; Anjan Trikha; Naveet Wig
Journal:  Indian J Med Res       Date:  2020 Jul & Aug       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 5.  Field-Effect Sensors for Virus Detection: From Ebola to SARS-CoV-2 and Plant Viral Enhancers.

Authors:  Arshak Poghossian; Melanie Jablonski; Denise Molinnus; Christina Wege; Michael J Schöning
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2020-11-24       Impact factor: 5.753

6.  Usefulness of rapid antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 screening of healthcare workers: a pilot study.

Authors:  Anja Šterbenc; Viktorija Tomič; Urška Bidovec Stojković; Katja Vrankar; Aleš Rozman; Mihaela Zidarn
Journal:  Clin Exp Med       Date:  2021-05-22       Impact factor: 5.057

7.  Reliable detection of SARS-CoV-2 with patient-collected swabs and saline gargles: A three-headed comparison on multiple molecular platforms.

Authors:  Jason J LeBlanc; Janice Pettipas; Melanie Di Quinzio; Todd F Hatchette; Glenn Patriquin
Journal:  J Virol Methods       Date:  2021-05-23       Impact factor: 2.623

8.  Clinical performance and accuracy of a qPCR-based SARS-CoV-2 mass-screening workflow for healthcare-worker surveillance using pooled self-sampled gargling solutions: A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Flaminia Olearo; Dominik Nörz; Armin Hoffman; Moritz Grunwald; Kimani Gatzemeyer; Martin Christner; Anna Both; Cristina Elena Belmar Campos; Platon Braun; Gabriele Andersen; Susanne Pfefferle; Antonia Zapf; Martin Aepfelbacher; Johannes K M Knobloch; Marc Lütgehetmann
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  2021-09-06       Impact factor: 6.072

9.  Performance of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Real-Time RT-PCR Tests on Oral Rinses and Saliva Samples.

Authors:  N Esther Babady; Tracy McMillen; Krupa Jani; Agnes Viale; Elizabeth V Robilotti; Anoshe Aslam; Maureen Diver; Desiree Sokoli; Greg Mason; Monika K Shah; Deborah Korenstein; Mini Kamboj
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2020-11-17       Impact factor: 5.568

10.  High Efficacy of Saliva in Detecting SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR in Adults and Children.

Authors:  Michael Huber; Peter Werner Schreiber; Thomas Scheier; Annette Audigé; Roberto Buonomano; Alain Rudiger; Dominique L Braun; Gerhard Eich; Dagmar I Keller; Barbara Hasse; Jürg Böni; Christoph Berger; Huldrych F Günthard; Amapola Manrique; Alexandra Trkola
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2021-03-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.