Cargando…

Saliva sample as a non-invasive specimen for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES: Amid the increasing number of pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, there is a need for a quick and easy method to obtain a non-invasive sample for the detection of this novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SARS-CoV-2). We aimed to investigate...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pasomsub, E., Watcharananan, S.P., Boonyawat, K., Janchompoo, P., Wongtabtim, G., Suksuwan, W., Sungkanuparph, S., Phuphuakrat, A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7227531/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32422408
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.05.001
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: Amid the increasing number of pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, there is a need for a quick and easy method to obtain a non-invasive sample for the detection of this novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SARS-CoV-2). We aimed to investigate the potential use of saliva samples as a non-invasive tool for the diagnosis of COVID-19. METHODS: From 27 March to 4 April 2020, we prospectively collected saliva samples and a standard nasopharyngeal and throat swab in persons seeking care at an acute respiratory infection clinic in a university hospital during the outbreak of COVID-19. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was performed, and the results of the two specimens were compared. RESULTS: Two-hundred pairs of samples were collected. Sixty-nine (34.5%) individuals were male, and the median (interquartile) age was 36 (28–48) years. Using nasopharyngeal and throat swab RT-PCR as the reference standard, the prevalence of COVID-19 diagnosed by nasopharyngeal and throat swab RT-PCR was 9.5%. The sensitivity and specificity of the saliva sample RT-PCR were 84.2% (95% CI 60.4%–96.6%), and 98.9% (95% CI 96.1%–99.9%), respectively. An analysis of the agreement between the two specimens demonstrated 97.5% observed agreement (κ coefficient 0.851, 95% CI 0.723–0.979; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Saliva might be an alternative specimen for the diagnosis of COVID-19. The collection is non-invasive, and non-aerosol generating. This method could facilitate the diagnosis of the disease, given the simplicity of specimen collection and good diagnostic performance.