Jie Zhang1, Kecheng Li1, Ling Zheng2, Jianbo Zhang1, Zhilin Ren1, Tiange Song1, Hua Yu1, Zhenglin Yang1,3, Li Wang4, Li Jiang1. 1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China. 2. Department of Medical Administration, Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences & Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, Chengdu, China. 3. Sichuan Provincial Key Laboratory for Human Disease Gene Study, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China. 4. Department of Nephrology, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Abstract
Background: SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing (NAT) has been routinely used for COVID-19 diagnosis during this pandemic; however, there have been concerns about its high false negative rate. We dissected its detection efficiency with a large COVID-19 cohort study. Methods: We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 NAT positive rates of 4,275 specimens from 532 COVID-19 patients in Sichuan Province with different disease severities, statuses, and stages, as well as different types and numbers of specimens. Results: The total positive rate of the 4,275 specimens was 37.5%. Among seven specimen types, BALF generated a 77.8% positive rate, followed by URT specimens (38.5%), sputum (39.8%), and feces/rectal swabs (34.1%). Specimens from critical cases generated a 43.4% positive rate, which was significantly higher than that of other severities. With specimens from patients at stable status, the SARS-CoV-2 positive rate was 40.6%, which was significantly higher than that of improved status (17.1%), but lower than that of aggravated status (61.5%). Notably, the positive rate of specimens from COVID-19 patients varied significantly from 85 to 95% during 3 days before and after symptom onset, to 20% at around 18 days after symptom onset. In addition, the detection rate increased from 72.1% after testing one throat swab, to 93.2% after testing three consecutive respiratory specimens from each patient. Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 NAT detection rates vary with patient disease severity and status, specimen type, number of specimens, and especially disease progression. Sampling as close to symptom onset as possible, and consecutively collecting more than one respiratory specimen could effectively improve SARS-CoV-2 NAT detection efficiency.
Background: SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing (NAT) has been routinely used for COVID-19 diagnosis during this pandemic; however, there have been concerns about its high false negative rate. We dissected its detection efficiency with a large COVID-19 cohort study. Methods: We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 NAT positive rates of 4,275 specimens from 532 COVID-19patients in Sichuan Province with different disease severities, statuses, and stages, as well as different types and numbers of specimens. Results: The total positive rate of the 4,275 specimens was 37.5%. Among seven specimen types, BALF generated a 77.8% positive rate, followed by URT specimens (38.5%), sputum (39.8%), and feces/rectal swabs (34.1%). Specimens from critical cases generated a 43.4% positive rate, which was significantly higher than that of other severities. With specimens from patients at stable status, the SARS-CoV-2 positive rate was 40.6%, which was significantly higher than that of improved status (17.1%), but lower than that of aggravated status (61.5%). Notably, the positive rate of specimens from COVID-19patients varied significantly from 85 to 95% during 3 days before and after symptom onset, to 20% at around 18 days after symptom onset. In addition, the detection rate increased from 72.1% after testing one throat swab, to 93.2% after testing three consecutive respiratory specimens from each patient. Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 NAT detection rates vary with patient disease severity and status, specimen type, number of specimens, and especially disease progression. Sampling as close to symptom onset as possible, and consecutively collecting more than one respiratory specimen could effectively improve SARS-CoV-2 NAT detection efficiency.
Authors: Ping Wang; Neil Anderson; Yang Pan; Leo Poon; Carmen Charlton; Nathan Zelyas; David Persing; Daniel Rhoads; Hilary Babcock Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Roman Wölfel; Victor M Corman; Wolfgang Guggemos; Michael Seilmaier; Sabine Zange; Marcel A Müller; Daniela Niemeyer; Terry C Jones; Patrick Vollmar; Camilla Rothe; Michael Hoelscher; Tobias Bleicker; Sebastian Brünink; Julia Schneider; Rosina Ehmann; Katrin Zwirglmaier; Christian Drosten; Clemens Wendtner Journal: Nature Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: J S M Peiris; C M Chu; V C C Cheng; K S Chan; I F N Hung; L L M Poon; K I Law; B S F Tang; T Y W Hon; C S Chan; K H Chan; J S C Ng; B J Zheng; W L Ng; R W M Lai; Y Guan; K Y Yuen Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-05-24 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Chunbao Xie; Lingxi Jiang; Guo Huang; Hong Pu; Bo Gong; He Lin; Shi Ma; Xuemei Chen; Bo Long; Guo Si; Hua Yu; Li Jiang; Xingxiang Yang; Yi Shi; Zhenglin Yang Journal: Int J Infect Dis Date: 2020-02-27 Impact factor: 3.623
Authors: Silvia Würstle; Christoph D Spinner; Florian Voit; Dieter Hoffmann; Svenja Hering; Simon Weidlich; Jochen Schneider; Alexander Zink; Matthias Treiber; Roman Iakoubov; Roland M Schmid; Ulrike Protzer; Johanna Erber Journal: Infection Date: 2021-05-10 Impact factor: 3.553