Cargando…

Utility of Stool PCR for the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Comparison of Two Commercial Platforms

The ability to detect SARS-CoV-2 in the upper respiratory tract ceases after 2 to 3 weeks post-symptom-onset in most patients. In contrast, SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in the stool of some patients for greater than 4 weeks, suggesting that stool may hold utility as an additional source for diagnosis....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Szymczak, Wendy A., Goldstein, D. Yitzchak, Orner, Erika P., Fecher, Roger A., Yokoda, Raquel T., Skalina, Karin A., Narlieva, Momka, Gendlina, Inessa, Fox, Amy S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Society for Microbiology 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7448643/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32611796
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01369-20
Descripción
Sumario:The ability to detect SARS-CoV-2 in the upper respiratory tract ceases after 2 to 3 weeks post-symptom-onset in most patients. In contrast, SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in the stool of some patients for greater than 4 weeks, suggesting that stool may hold utility as an additional source for diagnosis. We validated the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and Hologic Panther Fusion real-time RT-PCR assays for detection of viral RNA in stool specimens and compared performance. We utilized remnant stool specimens (n = 79) from 77 patients with gastrointestinal symptoms. Forty-eight patients had PCR-confirmed COVID-19, and 29 either were nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal PCR negative or presented for reasons unrelated to COVID-19 and were not tested. Positive percent agreement between the Cepheid and Hologic assays was 93% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 81.1% to 98.2%), and negative percent agreement was 96% (95% CI: 89% to 0.99%). Four discrepant specimens (Cepheid positive only, n = 2; Hologic positive only, n = 2) exhibited average cycle threshold (C(T)) values of >37 for the targets detected. Of the 48 patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19, 23 were positive by both assays (47.9%). For the negative patient group, 2/29 were positive by both assays (6.9%). The two stool PCR-positive, nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal PCR-negative patients were SARS-CoV-2 IgG positive. Our results demonstrate acceptable agreement between two commercially available molecular assays and support the use of stool PCR to confirm diagnosis when SARS-CoV-2 is undetectable in the upper respiratory tract.