Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point-of-care assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2
During the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, logistic problems associated with specimen collection limited the SARS-CoV-2 testing, especially in the community. In this study, we assessed the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva as specimens for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in an automate...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis Group
2020-01-01
|
| Series: | Emerging Microbes and Infections |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/22221751.2020.1775133 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850200687799959552 |
|---|---|
| author | Jonathan Hon-Kwan Chen Cyril Chik-Yan Yip Rosana Wing-Shan Poon Kwok-Hung Chan Vincent Chi-Chung Cheng Ivan Fan-Ngai Hung Jasper Fuk-Woo Chan Kwok-Yung Yuen Kelvin Kai-Wang To |
| author_facet | Jonathan Hon-Kwan Chen Cyril Chik-Yan Yip Rosana Wing-Shan Poon Kwok-Hung Chan Vincent Chi-Chung Cheng Ivan Fan-Ngai Hung Jasper Fuk-Woo Chan Kwok-Yung Yuen Kelvin Kai-Wang To |
| author_sort | Jonathan Hon-Kwan Chen |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | During the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, logistic problems associated with specimen collection limited the SARS-CoV-2 testing, especially in the community. In this study, we assessed the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva as specimens for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in an automated point-of-care molecular assay. Archived nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and posterior oropharyngeal saliva specimens of 58 COVID-19 patients were tested with the Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in either NPS or saliva specimens of all patients. Among them, 84.5% (49/58) tested positive in both NPS and saliva, 10.3% (6/58) tested positive in NPS only, and 5.2% (3/58) tested positive in saliva only. No significant difference in the detection rate was observed between NPS and saliva (McNemar’s test p = 0.5078). The detection rate was slightly higher for N2 (NPS 94.8% and Saliva 93.1%) than that of the E gene target (Saliva: 89.7% vs 82.8%) on both specimen types. Significantly earlier median Ct value was observed for NPS comparing to that of saliva on both E (26.8 vs 29.7, p = 0.0002) and N2 gene target (29.3 vs 32.3, p = 0.0002). The median Ct value of E gene target was significantly earlier than that of the N2 gene target for both NPS (26.8 vs 29.3, p < 0.0001) and saliva (29.7 vs 32.3, p < 0.0001). In conclusion, posterior oropharyngeal saliva and NPS were found to have similar detection rates in the point-of-care test for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Since posterior oropharyngeal saliva can be collected easily, the use of saliva as an alternative specimen type for SARS-CoV-2 detection is recommended. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-09fdacf250c94cc0ab47e628416da1ca |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2222-1751 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2020-01-01 |
| publisher | Taylor & Francis Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Emerging Microbes and Infections |
| spelling | doaj-art-09fdacf250c94cc0ab47e628416da1ca2025-08-20T02:12:15ZengTaylor & Francis GroupEmerging Microbes and Infections2222-17512020-01-01911356135910.1080/22221751.2020.1775133Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point-of-care assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2Jonathan Hon-Kwan Chen0Cyril Chik-Yan Yip1Rosana Wing-Shan Poon2Kwok-Hung Chan3Vincent Chi-Chung Cheng4Ivan Fan-Ngai Hung5Jasper Fuk-Woo Chan6Kwok-Yung Yuen7Kelvin Kai-Wang To8Department of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People’s Republic of ChinaDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People’s Republic of ChinaDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People’s Republic of ChinaState Key Laboratory for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Microbiology, Carol Yu Centre for Infection, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People’s Republic of ChinaDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People’s Republic of ChinaDepartment of Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People’s Republic of ChinaDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People’s Republic of ChinaDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People’s Republic of ChinaDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People’s Republic of ChinaDuring the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, logistic problems associated with specimen collection limited the SARS-CoV-2 testing, especially in the community. In this study, we assessed the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva as specimens for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in an automated point-of-care molecular assay. Archived nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and posterior oropharyngeal saliva specimens of 58 COVID-19 patients were tested with the Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in either NPS or saliva specimens of all patients. Among them, 84.5% (49/58) tested positive in both NPS and saliva, 10.3% (6/58) tested positive in NPS only, and 5.2% (3/58) tested positive in saliva only. No significant difference in the detection rate was observed between NPS and saliva (McNemar’s test p = 0.5078). The detection rate was slightly higher for N2 (NPS 94.8% and Saliva 93.1%) than that of the E gene target (Saliva: 89.7% vs 82.8%) on both specimen types. Significantly earlier median Ct value was observed for NPS comparing to that of saliva on both E (26.8 vs 29.7, p = 0.0002) and N2 gene target (29.3 vs 32.3, p = 0.0002). The median Ct value of E gene target was significantly earlier than that of the N2 gene target for both NPS (26.8 vs 29.3, p < 0.0001) and saliva (29.7 vs 32.3, p < 0.0001). In conclusion, posterior oropharyngeal saliva and NPS were found to have similar detection rates in the point-of-care test for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Since posterior oropharyngeal saliva can be collected easily, the use of saliva as an alternative specimen type for SARS-CoV-2 detection is recommended.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/22221751.2020.1775133COVID-19SARS-CoV-2salivanasopharyngeal swabpoint-of-care testing |
| spellingShingle | Jonathan Hon-Kwan Chen Cyril Chik-Yan Yip Rosana Wing-Shan Poon Kwok-Hung Chan Vincent Chi-Chung Cheng Ivan Fan-Ngai Hung Jasper Fuk-Woo Chan Kwok-Yung Yuen Kelvin Kai-Wang To Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point-of-care assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 Emerging Microbes and Infections COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 saliva nasopharyngeal swab point-of-care testing |
| title | Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point-of-care assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 |
| title_full | Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point-of-care assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 |
| title_fullStr | Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point-of-care assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point-of-care assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 |
| title_short | Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point-of-care assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 |
| title_sort | evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point of care assay for the detection of sars cov 2 |
| topic | COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 saliva nasopharyngeal swab point-of-care testing |
| url | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/22221751.2020.1775133 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jonathanhonkwanchen evaluatingtheuseofposteriororopharyngealsalivainapointofcareassayforthedetectionofsarscov2 AT cyrilchikyanyip evaluatingtheuseofposteriororopharyngealsalivainapointofcareassayforthedetectionofsarscov2 AT rosanawingshanpoon evaluatingtheuseofposteriororopharyngealsalivainapointofcareassayforthedetectionofsarscov2 AT kwokhungchan evaluatingtheuseofposteriororopharyngealsalivainapointofcareassayforthedetectionofsarscov2 AT vincentchichungcheng evaluatingtheuseofposteriororopharyngealsalivainapointofcareassayforthedetectionofsarscov2 AT ivanfanngaihung evaluatingtheuseofposteriororopharyngealsalivainapointofcareassayforthedetectionofsarscov2 AT jasperfukwoochan evaluatingtheuseofposteriororopharyngealsalivainapointofcareassayforthedetectionofsarscov2 AT kwokyungyuen evaluatingtheuseofposteriororopharyngealsalivainapointofcareassayforthedetectionofsarscov2 AT kelvinkaiwangto evaluatingtheuseofposteriororopharyngealsalivainapointofcareassayforthedetectionofsarscov2 |