COVID-19住院患者唾液快速抗原检测SARS-CoV-2的研究

Q1 Environmental Science
Infection Ecology and Epidemiology Pub Date : 2021-10-29 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20008686.2021.1993535
Yang De Marinis, Anne-Katrine Pesola, Anna Söderlund Strand, Astrid Norman, Gustav Pernow, Markus Aldén, Runtao Yang, Magnus Rasmussen
{"title":"COVID-19住院患者唾液快速抗原检测SARS-CoV-2的研究","authors":"Yang De Marinis,&nbsp;Anne-Katrine Pesola,&nbsp;Anna Söderlund Strand,&nbsp;Astrid Norman,&nbsp;Gustav Pernow,&nbsp;Markus Aldén,&nbsp;Runtao Yang,&nbsp;Magnus Rasmussen","doi":"10.1080/20008686.2021.1993535","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic presents great challenges on transmission prevention, and rapid diagnosis is essential to reduce the disease spread. Various diagnostic methods are available to identify an ongoing infection by nasopharyngeal (NPH) swab sampling. However, the procedure requires handling by health care professionals, and therefore limits the application in household and community settings.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In this study, we aimed to determine if the detection of SARS-CoV-2 can be performed alternatively on saliva specimens by rapid antigen test.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Saliva and NPH specimens were collected from 44 patients with confirmed COVID-19. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test on saliva specimens, we compared the performance of four test products.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RT-qPCR was performed and NPH and saliva sampling had similar Ct values, which associated with disease duration. All four antigen tests showed similar trend in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in saliva, but with variation in the ability to detect positive cases. The rapid antigen test with the best performance could detect up to 67% of the positive cases with Ct values lower than 25, and disease duration shorter than 10 days.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study therefore supports saliva testing as an alternative diagnostic procedure to NPH testing, and that rapid antigen test on saliva provides a potential complement to PCR test to meet increasing screening demand.</p>","PeriodicalId":37446,"journal":{"name":"Infection Ecology and Epidemiology","volume":"11 1","pages":"1993535"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8567870/pdf/","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by rapid antigen tests on saliva in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.\",\"authors\":\"Yang De Marinis,&nbsp;Anne-Katrine Pesola,&nbsp;Anna Söderlund Strand,&nbsp;Astrid Norman,&nbsp;Gustav Pernow,&nbsp;Markus Aldén,&nbsp;Runtao Yang,&nbsp;Magnus Rasmussen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20008686.2021.1993535\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic presents great challenges on transmission prevention, and rapid diagnosis is essential to reduce the disease spread. Various diagnostic methods are available to identify an ongoing infection by nasopharyngeal (NPH) swab sampling. However, the procedure requires handling by health care professionals, and therefore limits the application in household and community settings.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In this study, we aimed to determine if the detection of SARS-CoV-2 can be performed alternatively on saliva specimens by rapid antigen test.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Saliva and NPH specimens were collected from 44 patients with confirmed COVID-19. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test on saliva specimens, we compared the performance of four test products.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RT-qPCR was performed and NPH and saliva sampling had similar Ct values, which associated with disease duration. All four antigen tests showed similar trend in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in saliva, but with variation in the ability to detect positive cases. The rapid antigen test with the best performance could detect up to 67% of the positive cases with Ct values lower than 25, and disease duration shorter than 10 days.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study therefore supports saliva testing as an alternative diagnostic procedure to NPH testing, and that rapid antigen test on saliva provides a potential complement to PCR test to meet increasing screening demand.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Infection Ecology and Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"1993535\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8567870/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Infection Ecology and Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20008686.2021.1993535\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Environmental Science\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Ecology and Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20008686.2021.1993535","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

背景:2019冠状病毒病大流行给传播预防带来了巨大挑战,快速诊断是减少疾病传播的关键。有多种诊断方法可用于通过鼻咽拭子取样确定正在发生的感染。然而,该程序需要由卫生保健专业人员处理,因此限制了在家庭和社区环境中的应用。目的:在本研究中,我们旨在确定是否可以通过快速抗原试验替代唾液标本检测SARS-CoV-2。研究设计:收集44例确诊COVID-19患者的唾液和NPH标本。为了评估唾液标本SARS-CoV-2即时快速抗原检测的诊断准确性,我们比较了四种检测产品的性能。结果:经RT-qPCR检测,NPH值与唾液样本Ct值相近,且Ct值与病程相关。所有四种抗原检测在唾液中检测出SARS-CoV-2的趋势相似,但检测出阳性病例的能力存在差异。在Ct值小于25、病程短于10天的病例中,快速抗原试验检出率高达67%,表现最佳。结论:因此,我们的研究支持唾液检测作为NPH检测的替代诊断程序,并且唾液快速抗原检测为PCR检测提供了潜在的补充,以满足日益增长的筛查需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by rapid antigen tests on saliva in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by rapid antigen tests on saliva in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by rapid antigen tests on saliva in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by rapid antigen tests on saliva in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic presents great challenges on transmission prevention, and rapid diagnosis is essential to reduce the disease spread. Various diagnostic methods are available to identify an ongoing infection by nasopharyngeal (NPH) swab sampling. However, the procedure requires handling by health care professionals, and therefore limits the application in household and community settings.

Objectives: In this study, we aimed to determine if the detection of SARS-CoV-2 can be performed alternatively on saliva specimens by rapid antigen test.

Study design: Saliva and NPH specimens were collected from 44 patients with confirmed COVID-19. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test on saliva specimens, we compared the performance of four test products.

Results: RT-qPCR was performed and NPH and saliva sampling had similar Ct values, which associated with disease duration. All four antigen tests showed similar trend in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in saliva, but with variation in the ability to detect positive cases. The rapid antigen test with the best performance could detect up to 67% of the positive cases with Ct values lower than 25, and disease duration shorter than 10 days.

Conclusion: Our study therefore supports saliva testing as an alternative diagnostic procedure to NPH testing, and that rapid antigen test on saliva provides a potential complement to PCR test to meet increasing screening demand.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Infection Ecology and Epidemiology
Infection Ecology and Epidemiology Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Infection Ecology & Epidemiology aims to stimulate inter-disciplinary collaborations dealing with a range of subjects, from the plethora of zoonotic infections in humans, over diseases with implication in wildlife ecology, to advanced virology and bacteriology. The journal specifically welcomes papers from studies where researchers from multiple medical and ecological disciplines are collaborating so as to increase our knowledge of the emergence, spread and effect of new and re-emerged infectious diseases in humans, domestic animals and wildlife. Main areas of interest include, but are not limited to: 1.Zoonotic microbioorganisms 2.Vector borne infections 3.Gastrointestinal pathogens 4.Antimicrobial resistance 5.Zoonotic microbioorganisms in changing environment
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信