Literature DB >> 33674284

Evaluation of Specimen Types and Saliva Stabilization Solutions for SARS-CoV-2 Testing.

Sara B Griesemer1, Greta Van Slyke1, Dylan Ehrbar1, Klemen Strle1, Tugba Yildirim1, Dominick A Centurioni1, Anne C Walsh2, Andrew K Chang3, Michael J Waxman3, Kirsten St George4,5.   

Abstract

Identifying SARS-CoV-2 infections through aggressive diagnostic testing remains critical to tracking and curbing the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. Collection of nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), the preferred sample type for SARS-CoV-2 detection, has become difficult due to the dramatic increase in testing and consequent supply strain. Therefore, alternative specimen types have been investigated that provide similar detection sensitivity with reduced health care exposure and the potential for self-collection. In this study, the detection sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 in nasal swabs (NS) and saliva was compared to that of NPS using matched specimens from two outpatient cohorts in New York State (total n = 463). The first cohort showed only a 5.4% positivity, but the second cohort (n = 227) had a positivity rate of 41%, with sensitivity in NPS, NS, and saliva of 97.9%, 87.1%, and 87.1%, respectively. Whether the reduced sensitivity of NS or saliva is acceptable must be assessed in the settings where they are used. However, we sought to improve on it by validating a method to mix the two sample types, as the combination of nasal swab and saliva resulted in 94.6% SARS-CoV-2 detection sensitivity. Spiking experiments showed that combining them did not adversely affect the detection sensitivity in either. Virus stability in saliva was also investigated, with and without the addition of commercially available stabilizing solutions. The virus was stable in saliva at both 4°C and room temperature for up to 7 days. The addition of stabilizing solutions did not enhance stability and, in some situations, reduced detectable virus levels.
Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19; nasal swab; nasopharyngeal swab; saliva; sample type

Year:  2021        PMID: 33674284     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01418-20

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


  23 in total

1.  Real-time optical analysis of a colorimetric LAMP assay for SARS-CoV-2 in saliva with a handheld instrument improves accuracy compared with endpoint assessment.

Authors:  Lena M Diaz; Brandon E Johnson; Daniel M Jenkins
Journal:  J Biomol Tech       Date:  2021-09

2.  SARS-CoV-2 saliva testing using RT-PCR: a systematic review.

Authors:  Eyituoyo Okoturo; Mary Amure
Journal:  Int J Infect Dis       Date:  2022-05-13       Impact factor: 12.074

3.  Efficient SARS-CoV-2 Quantitative Reverse Transcriptase PCR Saliva Diagnostic Strategy utilizing Open-Source Pipetting Robots.

Authors:  Rachel E Ham; Austin R Smothers; Mark A Blenner; Delphine Dean; Kylie L King; Justin M Napolitano; Theodore J Swann; Lesslie G Pekarek
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 1.424

Review 4.  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

5.  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

6.  COVID-19: Test, Test and Test.

Authors:  Fatima A Saleh; Aleen Sleem
Journal:  Med Sci (Basel)       Date:  2020-12-30

7.  Antigen tests for COVID-19.

Authors:  Yuta Kyosei; Sou Yamura; Mayuri Namba; Teruki Yoshimura; Satoshi Watabe; Etsuro Ito
Journal:  Biophys Physicobiol       Date:  2021-02-10

8.  Effect of varying storage conditions on diagnostic test outcomes of SARS-CoV-2.

Authors:  Satoshi Oguri; Shinichi Fujisawa; Keisuke Kamada; Sho Nakakubo; Yu Yamashita; Junichi Nakamura; Hiroshi Horii; Kazuki Sato; Mutsumi Nishida; Takanori Teshima; Yoichi Ohiro; Ayato Takada; Satoshi Konno
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  2021-04-03       Impact factor: 6.072

9.  Relative sensitivity of anterior nares and nasopharyngeal swabs for initial detection of SARS-CoV-2 in ambulatory patients: Rapid review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yaolin Zhou; Timothy J O'Leary
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-07-20       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: a review of molecular diagnostic tools including sample collection and commercial response with associated advantages and limitations.

Authors:  Harikrishnan Jayamohan; Christopher J Lambert; Himanshu J Sant; Alexander Jafek; Dhruv Patel; Haidong Feng; Michael Beeman; Tawsif Mahmood; Ugochukwu Nze; Bruce K Gale
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2020-10-18       Impact factor: 4.142

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.