Journals / Marmara Medical Journal / 2021 / Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 1

Evaluation of different respiratory samples and saliva for the detection of SARS CoV-2 RNA

Pages
51–56
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Saliva samples might be considered as an alternative specimen.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: We aimed to analyse the positivity rate and cycle threshold values indicating viral loads for SARS CoV-2 among different respiratory specimens and also to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of saliva samples.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: We included combined oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swab (cONS), sputum, and tracheal aspirate (TA) specimens of patients.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Saliva samples might be considered as an alternative specimen.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: We aimed to analyse the positivity rate and cycle threshold values indicating viral loads for SARS CoV-2 among different respiratory specimens and also to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of saliva samples. Materials and Methods: We included combined oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swab (cONS), sputum, and tracheal aspirate (TA) specimens of patients. Unpreserved saliva samples were collected prospectively from hospitalized patients within 72 hours of admission. SARS CoV-2 RNA was extracted by using Bio-Speedy viral nucleic acid buffer than RT-PCR was performed with BioSpeedy COVID-19 qPCR detection kit. Results: Retrospective evaluation revealed SARS CoV-2 RNA in 19.66% of cONS (n: 5819), 30.77% of sputum (n: 39), 29.41% of TA samples (n: 34) from 4812 patients. In the majority (86.72%) of the samples, the first cONS sample was positive. Consecutive cONS and sputum/TA samples were investigated in 52 patients of whom 11 were positive with either of these samples. Saliva positivity was detected in 60% of cONS positive (n: 20) and 30% of cONS negative (n: 12) patients. Conclusion: Although, cONS samples show the greatest diagnostic guidance, repeated sampling from multiple sites of the respiratory tract increases the possibility of COVID-19 diagnosis. Saliva samples might be considered as an alternative specimen.

🔖

Cite This Article

SARINOĞLU, R. C., GUNESER, D., ŞENGEL, B. E., KORTEN, V., YAGCI, A. K. (2021). Evaluation of different respiratory samples and saliva for the detection of SARS CoV-2 RNA. Marmara Medical Journal, Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 1, 51–56. https://ajindex.com/articles/283765

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W et al. China Novel Coronavirus Investigating and Research Team. A Novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med 2020;382:727-33. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2001017
  2. World Health Organization. Diagnostic testing for SARSCoV-2, interim guidance. https://www.who.int/publications/i/ item/diagnostic-testing-for-sars-cov-2 (accessed 20 September 2020)
  3. World Health Organization. COVID 19 Weekly Epidemiological Update, file:///C:/Users/HP/Downloads/20201201_Weekly_ Epi_Update_16.pdf, (accessed 3 December 2020)
  4. Turkish Ministry of Health, https://covid19.saglik.gov.tr/, (accessed 3 December 2020)
  5. See A, Toh ST. Respiratory sampling for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2: An Overview. Head Neck 2020;42:1652-6. doi:10.1002/hed.26232
  6. Zou L, Ruan F, Huang M, et al. SARS-CoV-2 Viral load in upper respiratory specimens of infected patients. N Engl J Med 2020;382:1177-9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2001737
  7. Xie C, Jiang L, Huang G, et al. Comparison of different samples for 2019 novel coronavirus detection by nucleic acid amplification tests. Int J Infect Dis 2020;93:264-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.02.050
  8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Interim Guidelines for Collecting. Handling, and Testing Clinical Specimens from Persons for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/ lab/guidelines-clinical-specimens.html, (accessed September 19, 2020)
  9. The Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Health, Directorate General of Public Health, COVID 19 (SARS-CoV-2 Infection) Guide, Study of Scientific Board, General Information, Epidemiology and Diagnosis, 30 May 2020, https://hsgm. saglik.gov.tr/depo/birimler/goc_sagligi/covid19/rehber/ COVID-19_Rehberi20200414_eng_v4_002_14.05.2020.pdf, (accessed 1 November 2020)
  10. Pan Y, Zhang D, Yang P, Poon LLM, Wang Q. Viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples. Lancet Infect Dis 2020;20:411-2. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30113-4
  11. Huang Y, Chen S, Yang Z, et al. SARS-CoV-2 viral load in clinical samples from critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2020;201:1435-8. doi:10.1164/rccm.202.003.0572LE
  12. Patel R, Babady E, Theel ES, et al. Report from the American Society for Microbiology COVID-19 International Summit, 23 March 2020: Value of diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2/ COVID-19. mBio 2020;11:e00722-20. doi: 10.1128/mBio
  13. Williams E, Bond K, Zhang B, Putland M, Williamson DA. Saliva as a nonin