Cargando…
Comparison between Nasal and Nasopharyngeal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection in an Asymptomatic Population, and Direct Confirmation by RT-PCR from the Residual Buffer
Containment measures employed during the COVID-19 pandemic included prompt recognition of cases, isolation, and contact tracing. Bilateral nasal (NA) swabs applied to a commercial antigen-based rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) offer a simpler and more comfortable alternative to nasopharyngeal (NP) col...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Society for Microbiology
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8849095/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35171010 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02455-21 |
_version_ | 1784652394899963904 |
---|---|
author | Patriquin, Glenn LeBlanc, Jason J. Williams, Catherine Hatchette, Todd F. Ross, John Barrett, Lisa Davidson, Ross |
author_facet | Patriquin, Glenn LeBlanc, Jason J. Williams, Catherine Hatchette, Todd F. Ross, John Barrett, Lisa Davidson, Ross |
author_sort | Patriquin, Glenn |
collection | PubMed |
description | Containment measures employed during the COVID-19 pandemic included prompt recognition of cases, isolation, and contact tracing. Bilateral nasal (NA) swabs applied to a commercial antigen-based rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) offer a simpler and more comfortable alternative to nasopharyngeal (NP) collection; however, little is known about the sensitivity of this method in an asymptomatic population. Participants in community-based asymptomatic testing sites were screened for SARS-CoV-2 using an Ag-RDT with NP sampling. Positive individuals returned for confirmatory molecular testing and consented to repeating the Ag-RDT using a bilateral NA swab for comparison. Residual test buffer (RTB) from Ag-RDTs was subjected to real-time reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR). Of 123,617 asymptomatic individuals, 197 NP Ag-RDT-positive participants were included, with 175 confirmed positive by RT-PCR. Of these cases, 154 were identified from the NA swab collection with Ag-RDT, with a sensitivity of 88.0% compared to the NP swab collection. Stratifying results by RT-PCR cycle threshold demonstrated that sensitivity of the nasal collection method varied based on the cycle threshold (C(T)) value of the paired RT-PCR sample. RT-PCR testing on the RTB from the Ag-RDT using NP and NA swab collections resulted in 100.0% and 98.7% sensitivity, respectively. NA swabs provide an adequate alternative to NP swab collection for use with Ag-RDT, with the recognition that the test is most sensitive in specimens with high viral loads. With the high sensitivity of RT-PCR testing on RTB from Ag-RDT, a more streamlined approach to confirmatory testing is possible without recollection or use of paired collections strategies. IMPORTANCE Nasal swabbing for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) comes with many benefits but is slightly less sensitive than traditional nasopharyngeal swabbing; however, confirmatory lab-based testing could be performed directly from the residual buffer from either sample type. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8849095 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | American Society for Microbiology |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88490952022-02-17 Comparison between Nasal and Nasopharyngeal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection in an Asymptomatic Population, and Direct Confirmation by RT-PCR from the Residual Buffer Patriquin, Glenn LeBlanc, Jason J. Williams, Catherine Hatchette, Todd F. Ross, John Barrett, Lisa Davidson, Ross Microbiol Spectr Research Article Containment measures employed during the COVID-19 pandemic included prompt recognition of cases, isolation, and contact tracing. Bilateral nasal (NA) swabs applied to a commercial antigen-based rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) offer a simpler and more comfortable alternative to nasopharyngeal (NP) collection; however, little is known about the sensitivity of this method in an asymptomatic population. Participants in community-based asymptomatic testing sites were screened for SARS-CoV-2 using an Ag-RDT with NP sampling. Positive individuals returned for confirmatory molecular testing and consented to repeating the Ag-RDT using a bilateral NA swab for comparison. Residual test buffer (RTB) from Ag-RDTs was subjected to real-time reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR). Of 123,617 asymptomatic individuals, 197 NP Ag-RDT-positive participants were included, with 175 confirmed positive by RT-PCR. Of these cases, 154 were identified from the NA swab collection with Ag-RDT, with a sensitivity of 88.0% compared to the NP swab collection. Stratifying results by RT-PCR cycle threshold demonstrated that sensitivity of the nasal collection method varied based on the cycle threshold (C(T)) value of the paired RT-PCR sample. RT-PCR testing on the RTB from the Ag-RDT using NP and NA swab collections resulted in 100.0% and 98.7% sensitivity, respectively. NA swabs provide an adequate alternative to NP swab collection for use with Ag-RDT, with the recognition that the test is most sensitive in specimens with high viral loads. With the high sensitivity of RT-PCR testing on RTB from Ag-RDT, a more streamlined approach to confirmatory testing is possible without recollection or use of paired collections strategies. IMPORTANCE Nasal swabbing for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) comes with many benefits but is slightly less sensitive than traditional nasopharyngeal swabbing; however, confirmatory lab-based testing could be performed directly from the residual buffer from either sample type. American Society for Microbiology 2022-02-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8849095/ /pubmed/35171010 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02455-21 Text en Copyright © 2022 Patriquin et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Research Article Patriquin, Glenn LeBlanc, Jason J. Williams, Catherine Hatchette, Todd F. Ross, John Barrett, Lisa Davidson, Ross Comparison between Nasal and Nasopharyngeal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection in an Asymptomatic Population, and Direct Confirmation by RT-PCR from the Residual Buffer |
title | Comparison between Nasal and Nasopharyngeal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection in an Asymptomatic Population, and Direct Confirmation by RT-PCR from the Residual Buffer |
title_full | Comparison between Nasal and Nasopharyngeal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection in an Asymptomatic Population, and Direct Confirmation by RT-PCR from the Residual Buffer |
title_fullStr | Comparison between Nasal and Nasopharyngeal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection in an Asymptomatic Population, and Direct Confirmation by RT-PCR from the Residual Buffer |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison between Nasal and Nasopharyngeal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection in an Asymptomatic Population, and Direct Confirmation by RT-PCR from the Residual Buffer |
title_short | Comparison between Nasal and Nasopharyngeal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection in an Asymptomatic Population, and Direct Confirmation by RT-PCR from the Residual Buffer |
title_sort | comparison between nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs for sars-cov-2 rapid antigen detection in an asymptomatic population, and direct confirmation by rt-pcr from the residual buffer |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8849095/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35171010 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02455-21 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT patriquinglenn comparisonbetweennasalandnasopharyngealswabsforsarscov2rapidantigendetectioninanasymptomaticpopulationanddirectconfirmationbyrtpcrfromtheresidualbuffer AT leblancjasonj comparisonbetweennasalandnasopharyngealswabsforsarscov2rapidantigendetectioninanasymptomaticpopulationanddirectconfirmationbyrtpcrfromtheresidualbuffer AT williamscatherine comparisonbetweennasalandnasopharyngealswabsforsarscov2rapidantigendetectioninanasymptomaticpopulationanddirectconfirmationbyrtpcrfromtheresidualbuffer AT hatchettetoddf comparisonbetweennasalandnasopharyngealswabsforsarscov2rapidantigendetectioninanasymptomaticpopulationanddirectconfirmationbyrtpcrfromtheresidualbuffer AT rossjohn comparisonbetweennasalandnasopharyngealswabsforsarscov2rapidantigendetectioninanasymptomaticpopulationanddirectconfirmationbyrtpcrfromtheresidualbuffer AT barrettlisa comparisonbetweennasalandnasopharyngealswabsforsarscov2rapidantigendetectioninanasymptomaticpopulationanddirectconfirmationbyrtpcrfromtheresidualbuffer AT davidsonross comparisonbetweennasalandnasopharyngealswabsforsarscov2rapidantigendetectioninanasymptomaticpopulationanddirectconfirmationbyrtpcrfromtheresidualbuffer |