Priyanka Kapoor1, Aman Chowdhry2, Om Prakash Kharbanda3, Deepika Bablani Popli4, Kamini Gautam5, Vikram Saini5. 1. Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India. 2. Oral Pathology & Microbiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India. 3. Dr. C.G. Pandit National Chair of ICMR, Department of Plastic Surgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India. 4. Oral Pathology & Microbiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India. dpopli@jmi.ac.in. 5. Laboratory of Infection Biology and Translational Research, Department of Biotechnology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Molecular diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 infection characteristically involves the sampling of the throat or nasopharyngeal swab (NPS). However, these procedures are invasive, require necessary skills for sample collection, cause patient discomfort, and are non-conducive for extensive scale testing. Saliva is increasingly being suggested as an alternate diagnostic sample in SARS-CoV-2 infection. OBJECTIVES: This scoping review was done with the objective of exploring the evidence on the role of saliva as an alternate diagnostic sample in SARS-CoV-2 condition. METHODS: Thorough search of the literature in major databases was undertaken in June 2020 using free text and MESH terms, followed by PRISMA to identify 17 studies for data extraction. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Evidence was summarised for study characteristics, salivary sampling characteristics, viral load, and longevity of virus in saliva. The literature supports that saliva offers a simple sample collection method compared to technique-sensitive NPS and has the advantage of point-of-care testing for initial screening in community or hospital-based set-up. The additional highlights of this review are heterogeneity in the current literature and the gaps in methodology. Therefore, a robust study design to generate higher levels of evidence has been proposed.
INTRODUCTION: Molecular diagene">nostics for n class="Disease">SARS-CoV-2 infection characteristically involves the sampling of the throat or nasopharyngeal swab (NPS). However, these procedures are invasive, require necessary skills for sample collection, cause patient discomfort, and are non-conducive for extensive scale testing. Saliva is increasingly being suggested as an alternate diagnostic sample in SARS-CoV-2 infection. OBJECTIVES: This scoping review was done with the objective of exploring the evidence on the role of saliva as an alternate diagnostic sample in SARS-CoV-2 condition. METHODS: Thorough search of the literature in major databases was undertaken in June 2020 using free text and MESH terms, followed by PRISMA to identify 17 studies for data extraction. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Evidence was summarised for study characteristics, salivary sampling characteristics, viral load, and longevity of virus in saliva. The literature supports that saliva offers a simple sample collection method compared to technique-sensitive NPS and has the advantage of point-of-care testing for initial screening in community or hospital-based set-up. The additional highlights of this review are heterogeneity in the current literature and the gaps in methodology. Therefore, a robust study design to generate higher levels of evidence has been proposed.
Authors: Christian Drosten; Lily-Lily Chiu; Marcus Panning; Hoe Nam Leong; Wolfgang Preiser; John S Tam; Stephan Günther; Stefanie Kramme; Petra Emmerich; Wooi Loon Ng; Herbert Schmitz; Evelyn S C Koay Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Rudragouda Channappanavar; Craig Fett; Matthias Mack; Patrick P Ten Eyck; David K Meyerholz; Stanley Perlman Journal: J Immunol Date: 2017-04-03 Impact factor: 5.422
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: Jin Gu Yoon; Jung Yoon; Joon Young Song; Soo Young Yoon; Chae Seung Lim; Hye Seong; Ji Yun Noh; Hee Jin Cheong; Woo Joo Kim Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2020-05-25 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Giacomo Pirovano; Alvaro A Ordonez; Sanjay K Jain; Thomas Reiner; Laurence S Carroll; Naga Vara Kishore Pillarsetty Journal: Nucl Med Biol Date: 2021-05-25 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Eva Rajh; Tina Šket; Arne Praznik; Petra Sušjan; Alenka Šmid; Dunja Urbančič; Irena Mlinarič-Raščan; Polona Kogovšek; Tina Demšar; Mojca Milavec; Katarina Prosenc Trilar; Žiga Jensterle; Mihaela Zidarn; Viktorija Tomič; Gabriele Turel; Tatjana Lejko-Zupanc; Roman Jerala; Mojca Benčina Journal: Molecules Date: 2021-10-31 Impact factor: 4.411