Discordant SARS-CoV-2 Detection in the Nasopharynx Versus Trachea for Patients With Tracheostomies.

The Laryngoscope Pub Date : 2021-10-01 Epub Date: 2021-05-14 DOI:10.1002/lary.29617
Joshua D Smith, Jason A Correll, Jennifer L Stein, Robbi A Kupfer, Norman D Hogikyan, Robert J Morrison, Andrew P Stein
{"title":"Discordant SARS-CoV-2 Detection in the Nasopharynx Versus Trachea for Patients With Tracheostomies.","authors":"Joshua D Smith,&nbsp;Jason A Correll,&nbsp;Jennifer L Stein,&nbsp;Robbi A Kupfer,&nbsp;Norman D Hogikyan,&nbsp;Robert J Morrison,&nbsp;Andrew P Stein","doi":"10.1002/lary.29617","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives/hypothesis: </strong>Patients with tracheostomies have an anatomically altered connection between their upper and lower airways that could impact SARS-CoV-2 testing. Our goal was to evaluate for discordance in SARS-CoV-2 detection in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and tracheostomies based on the site analyzed.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective chart review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-institution study evaluated hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who had tracheostomies placed during their treatment. We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 RNA nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) results after tracheostomy. All included patients had nasopharyngeal (NP) and tracheal (TR) samples taken within a 48-hour period, allowing us to characterize rate of test concordance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-five patients met our inclusion criteria. Thirty-two (71.1%) patients had entirely concordant results after tracheostomy. However, 13 (28.9%) patients had at least one set of discordant results, the majority of which were NP negative and TR positive. There were no statistically significant differences in demographic or clinical variables, including time to tracheostomy and time to testing, among patients with concordant versus discordant SARS-CoV-2 results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This represents the first study to examine SARS-CoV-2 RNA NAAT concordance between NP and TR sites in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and tracheostomies. One-third of patients demonstrated discordant testing when NP and TR specimens were collected within a 48-hour time period. Thus, patients with tracheostomies may have a higher false-negative rate if only one site is assessed for SARS-CoV-2. We recommend analyzing samples from both the nasopharynx and trachea for these patients until more prospective data exist.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>4 Laryngoscope, 131:E2634-E2638, 2021.</p>","PeriodicalId":400976,"journal":{"name":"The Laryngoscope","volume":" ","pages":"E2634-E2638"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/lary.29617","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Laryngoscope","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.29617","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/5/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objectives/hypothesis: Patients with tracheostomies have an anatomically altered connection between their upper and lower airways that could impact SARS-CoV-2 testing. Our goal was to evaluate for discordance in SARS-CoV-2 detection in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and tracheostomies based on the site analyzed.

Study design: Retrospective chart review.

Methods: This single-institution study evaluated hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who had tracheostomies placed during their treatment. We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 RNA nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) results after tracheostomy. All included patients had nasopharyngeal (NP) and tracheal (TR) samples taken within a 48-hour period, allowing us to characterize rate of test concordance.

Results: Forty-five patients met our inclusion criteria. Thirty-two (71.1%) patients had entirely concordant results after tracheostomy. However, 13 (28.9%) patients had at least one set of discordant results, the majority of which were NP negative and TR positive. There were no statistically significant differences in demographic or clinical variables, including time to tracheostomy and time to testing, among patients with concordant versus discordant SARS-CoV-2 results.

Conclusion: This represents the first study to examine SARS-CoV-2 RNA NAAT concordance between NP and TR sites in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and tracheostomies. One-third of patients demonstrated discordant testing when NP and TR specimens were collected within a 48-hour time period. Thus, patients with tracheostomies may have a higher false-negative rate if only one site is assessed for SARS-CoV-2. We recommend analyzing samples from both the nasopharynx and trachea for these patients until more prospective data exist.

Level of evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:E2634-E2638, 2021.

Abstract Image

气管切开术患者鼻咽部与气管中SARS-CoV-2检测不一致
目的/假设:气管切开术患者的上、下气道之间的连接在解剖学上发生了改变,这可能影响SARS-CoV-2检测。我们的目的是根据分析的地点,评估COVID-19住院患者的SARS-CoV-2检测与气管切开术的不一致。研究设计:回顾性图表回顾。方法:本单机构研究评估了在治疗期间进行气管切开术的住院COVID-19患者。我们分析了气管切开术后SARS-CoV-2 RNA核酸扩增试验(NAAT)结果。所有纳入的患者都在48小时内采集了鼻咽(NP)和气管(TR)样本,使我们能够表征检测一致性的率。结果:45例患者符合我们的纳入标准。32例(71.1%)患者气管切开术后结果完全一致。然而,13例(28.9%)患者至少有一组结果不一致,其中大多数为NP阴性和TR阳性。在SARS-CoV-2结果一致与不一致的患者中,人口统计学或临床变量(包括气管切开术时间和检测时间)没有统计学上的显著差异。结论:本研究首次检测了COVID-19住院患者和气管切开术患者NP和TR位点的SARS-CoV-2 RNA NAAT一致性。当在48小时内采集NP和TR标本时,三分之一的患者表现出不一致的检测结果。因此,如果仅对一个部位进行SARS-CoV-2评估,气管切开术患者的假阴性率可能更高。我们建议分析这些患者的鼻咽和气管样本,直到有更多的前瞻性数据存在。证据等级:4喉镜,131:E2634-E2638, 2021。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信