Cargando…

Direct comparison of clinical diagnostic sensitivity of saliva from buccal swabs versus combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 Omicron

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: While current guidelines recommend the use of respiratory tract specimens for the direct detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection, saliva has recently been suggested as preferred sample type for the sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron). By comparing saliva collected usi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Puyskens, Andreas, Michel, Janine, Stoliaroff-Pepin, Anna, Bayram, Fatimanur, Sesver, Akin, Wichmann, Ole, Harder, Thomas, Schaade, Lars, Nitsche, Andreas, Peine, Caroline
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10207859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37269606
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2023.105496
_version_ 1785046547394723840
author Puyskens, Andreas
Michel, Janine
Stoliaroff-Pepin, Anna
Bayram, Fatimanur
Sesver, Akin
Wichmann, Ole
Harder, Thomas
Schaade, Lars
Nitsche, Andreas
Peine, Caroline
author_facet Puyskens, Andreas
Michel, Janine
Stoliaroff-Pepin, Anna
Bayram, Fatimanur
Sesver, Akin
Wichmann, Ole
Harder, Thomas
Schaade, Lars
Nitsche, Andreas
Peine, Caroline
author_sort Puyskens, Andreas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: While current guidelines recommend the use of respiratory tract specimens for the direct detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection, saliva has recently been suggested as preferred sample type for the sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron). By comparing saliva collected using buccal swabs and oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs from patients hospitalized due to COVID-19, we aimed at identifying potential differences in virus detection sensitivity between these sample types. METHODS: We compare the clinical diagnostic sensitivity of paired buccal swabs and combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs from hospitalized, symptomatic COVID-19 patients collected at median six days after symptom onset by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and antigen test. RESULTS: Of the tested SARS-CoV-2 positive sample pairs, 55.8% were identified as SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and 44.2% as Omicron BA.2. Real-time PCR from buccal swabs generated significantly higher quantification cycle (Cq) values compared to those from matched combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs and resulted in an increased number of false-negative PCR results. Reduced diagnostic sensitivity of buccal swabs by real-time PCR was observed already at day one after symptom onset. Similarly, antigen test detection rates were reduced in buccal swabs compared to combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest reduced clinical diagnostic sensitivity of saliva collected using buccal swabs when compared to combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron in symptomatic individuals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10207859
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102078592023-05-24 Direct comparison of clinical diagnostic sensitivity of saliva from buccal swabs versus combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 Omicron Puyskens, Andreas Michel, Janine Stoliaroff-Pepin, Anna Bayram, Fatimanur Sesver, Akin Wichmann, Ole Harder, Thomas Schaade, Lars Nitsche, Andreas Peine, Caroline J Clin Virol Article BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: While current guidelines recommend the use of respiratory tract specimens for the direct detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection, saliva has recently been suggested as preferred sample type for the sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron). By comparing saliva collected using buccal swabs and oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs from patients hospitalized due to COVID-19, we aimed at identifying potential differences in virus detection sensitivity between these sample types. METHODS: We compare the clinical diagnostic sensitivity of paired buccal swabs and combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs from hospitalized, symptomatic COVID-19 patients collected at median six days after symptom onset by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and antigen test. RESULTS: Of the tested SARS-CoV-2 positive sample pairs, 55.8% were identified as SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and 44.2% as Omicron BA.2. Real-time PCR from buccal swabs generated significantly higher quantification cycle (Cq) values compared to those from matched combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs and resulted in an increased number of false-negative PCR results. Reduced diagnostic sensitivity of buccal swabs by real-time PCR was observed already at day one after symptom onset. Similarly, antigen test detection rates were reduced in buccal swabs compared to combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest reduced clinical diagnostic sensitivity of saliva collected using buccal swabs when compared to combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron in symptomatic individuals. The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. 2023-08 2023-05-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10207859/ /pubmed/37269606 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2023.105496 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Article
Puyskens, Andreas
Michel, Janine
Stoliaroff-Pepin, Anna
Bayram, Fatimanur
Sesver, Akin
Wichmann, Ole
Harder, Thomas
Schaade, Lars
Nitsche, Andreas
Peine, Caroline
Direct comparison of clinical diagnostic sensitivity of saliva from buccal swabs versus combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 Omicron
title Direct comparison of clinical diagnostic sensitivity of saliva from buccal swabs versus combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 Omicron
title_full Direct comparison of clinical diagnostic sensitivity of saliva from buccal swabs versus combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 Omicron
title_fullStr Direct comparison of clinical diagnostic sensitivity of saliva from buccal swabs versus combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 Omicron
title_full_unstemmed Direct comparison of clinical diagnostic sensitivity of saliva from buccal swabs versus combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 Omicron
title_short Direct comparison of clinical diagnostic sensitivity of saliva from buccal swabs versus combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 Omicron
title_sort direct comparison of clinical diagnostic sensitivity of saliva from buccal swabs versus combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs in the detection of sars-cov-2 b.1.1.529 omicron
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10207859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37269606
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2023.105496
work_keys_str_mv AT puyskensandreas directcomparisonofclinicaldiagnosticsensitivityofsalivafrombuccalswabsversuscombinedoronasopharyngealswabsinthedetectionofsarscov2b11529omicron
AT micheljanine directcomparisonofclinicaldiagnosticsensitivityofsalivafrombuccalswabsversuscombinedoronasopharyngealswabsinthedetectionofsarscov2b11529omicron
AT stoliaroffpepinanna directcomparisonofclinicaldiagnosticsensitivityofsalivafrombuccalswabsversuscombinedoronasopharyngealswabsinthedetectionofsarscov2b11529omicron
AT bayramfatimanur directcomparisonofclinicaldiagnosticsensitivityofsalivafrombuccalswabsversuscombinedoronasopharyngealswabsinthedetectionofsarscov2b11529omicron
AT sesverakin directcomparisonofclinicaldiagnosticsensitivityofsalivafrombuccalswabsversuscombinedoronasopharyngealswabsinthedetectionofsarscov2b11529omicron
AT wichmannole directcomparisonofclinicaldiagnosticsensitivityofsalivafrombuccalswabsversuscombinedoronasopharyngealswabsinthedetectionofsarscov2b11529omicron
AT harderthomas directcomparisonofclinicaldiagnosticsensitivityofsalivafrombuccalswabsversuscombinedoronasopharyngealswabsinthedetectionofsarscov2b11529omicron
AT schaadelars directcomparisonofclinicaldiagnosticsensitivityofsalivafrombuccalswabsversuscombinedoronasopharyngealswabsinthedetectionofsarscov2b11529omicron
AT nitscheandreas directcomparisonofclinicaldiagnosticsensitivityofsalivafrombuccalswabsversuscombinedoronasopharyngealswabsinthedetectionofsarscov2b11529omicron
AT peinecaroline directcomparisonofclinicaldiagnosticsensitivityofsalivafrombuccalswabsversuscombinedoronasopharyngealswabsinthedetectionofsarscov2b11529omicron