Literature DB >> 33419948

Performance of Saliva Specimens for the Molecular Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in the Community Setting: Does Sample Collection Method Matter?

Marta Fernández-González1, Vanesa Agulló1, Mar Masiá2,3, Félix Gutiérrez2,3, Alba de la Rica4, Ana Infante5, Mar Carvajal1, José Alberto García1, Nieves Gonzalo-Jiménez4, Claudio Cuartero5, Montserrat Ruiz-García4, Carlos de Gregorio6, Manuel Sánchez6.   

Abstract

Data on the performance of saliva specimens for diagnosing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in ambulatory patients are scarce and inconsistent. We assessed saliva-based specimens for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) in the community setting and compared three different collection methods. This prospective study was conducted in three primary care centers. RT-PCR was performed on paired nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) and saliva samples collected from outpatients with a broad clinical spectrum of illness. To assess differences in collection methods, saliva specimens were obtained in a different way in each of the participating centers: supervised collection (SVC), oropharyngeal washing (OPW), and self-collection (SC). Pairs of NPS and saliva samples from 577 patients (median age, 39 years; 44% men; 42% asymptomatic) were collected and tested, and 120 (20.8%) gave positive results. The overall agreement with NPS results and kappa coefficients (κ) for saliva samples obtained by SVC, OPW, and SC were 95% (κ = 0.85), 93.4% (κ = 0.76), and 93.3% (κ = 0.76), respectively. The sensitivities (95% confidence intervals [95% CI]) of the saliva specimens ranged from 86% (72.6% to 93.7%) for SVC to 66.7% (50.4% to 80%) for SC samples. Sensitivity was higher for samples with lower cycle threshold (CT ) values. The best RT-PCR performance was observed for SVC, with sensitivities (95% CI) of 100% (85.9% to 100%) in symptomatic individuals and 88.9% (50.7% to 99.4%) in asymptomatic individuals at CT values of ≤30. We conclude that saliva is an acceptable specimen for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in the community setting. Specimens collected under supervision perform comparably to NPS and can effectively identify individuals at higher risk of transmission under real-life conditions.
Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19; PCR; SARS-CoV-2; diagnostics; saliva

Year:  2021        PMID: 33419948     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.03033-20

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  11 in total

1.  The Coronavirus Disease 2019 Spatial Care Path: Home, Community, and Emergency Diagnostic Portals.

Authors:  Gerald J Kost
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-12

Review 2.  Saliva as a diagnostic specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A scoping review.

Authors:  Yifei Wang; Akshaya Upadhyay; Sangeeth Pillai; Parisa Khayambashi; Simon D Tran
Journal:  Oral Dis       Date:  2022-04-21       Impact factor: 4.068

3.  The diagnostic accuracy of RT-PCR from self-collected saliva versus nasopharyngeal sampling: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Do Hyun Kim; Mohammed A Basurrah; Jae Hong Han; Sung Won Kim; Se Hwan Hwang
Journal:  Saudi Med J       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 1.422

4.  Can periodontal pockets and caries lesions act as reservoirs for coronavirus?

Authors:  Zuhair S Natto; Marwah Afeef; Muhammed A Bakhrebah; Heba Ashi; Khaled A Alzahrani; Abdulkarim F Alhetheel; Hansel M Fletcher
Journal:  Mol Oral Microbiol       Date:  2022-02-04       Impact factor: 4.107

Review 5.  Is saliva collected passively without forceful coughing sensitive to detect SARS-CoV-2 in ambulatory cases? A systematic review.

Authors:  Azadeh Ahmadieh; Sibel Dincer; Mahvash Navazesh
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol       Date:  2022-01-10

6.  Is the Alpha Variant of SARS-CoV-2 Associated with a Higher Viral Load than the Historical Strain in Saliva Samples in Patients with Mild to Moderate Symptoms?

Authors:  Camille Bonnet; Shirley Masse; Hayat Benamar; Ana-Maria Vilcu; Morgane Swital; Thomas Hanslik; Sylvie van der Werf; Xavier Duval; Fabrice Carrat; Alessandra Falchi; Thierry Blanchon
Journal:  Life (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-21

Review 7.  SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostics Based on Nucleic Acids Amplification: From Fundamental Concepts to Applications and Beyond.

Authors:  João M Vindeirinho; Eva Pinho; Nuno F Azevedo; Carina Almeida
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 5.293

8.  Performance of saliva compared with nasopharyngeal swab for diagnosis of COVID-19 by NAAT in cross-sectional studies: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Donald Brody Duncan; Katharine Mackett; Muhammad Usman Ali; Deborah Yamamura; Cynthia Balion
Journal:  Clin Biochem       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 3.625

Review 9.  Saliva as an alternative specimen to nasopharyngeal swabs for COVID-19 diagnosis: Review.

Authors:  Leah McPhillips; John MacSharry
Journal:  Access Microbiol       Date:  2022-05-20

10.  Accuracy of saliva and nasopharyngeal sampling for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in community screening: a multicentric cohort study.

Authors:  Solen Kernéis; Caroline Elie; Jacques Fourgeaud; Laure Choupeaux; Séverine Mercier Delarue; Marie-Laure Alby; Pierre Quentin; Juliette Pavie; Patricia Brazille; Marie Laure Néré; Marine Minier; Audrey Gabassi; Aurélien Gibaud; Sébastien Gauthier; Chrystel Leroy; Etienne Voirin-Mathieu; Claire Poyart; Michel Vidaud; Béatrice Parfait; Constance Delaugerre; Jean-Marc Tréluyer; Jérôme LeGoff
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 3.267

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.