• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

J Infect Dis . Prospective study comparing deep-throat saliva with other respiratory tract specimens in the diagnosis of novel coronavirus disease

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
J Infect Dis


. 2020 Aug 1;jiaa487.
doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiaa487. Online ahead of print.
Prospective study comparing deep-throat saliva with other respiratory tract specimens in the diagnosis of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19)


Christopher K C Lai[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Zigui Chen[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Grace Lui[SUP] 2 3 [/SUP], Lowell Ling[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Timothy Li[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Martin C S Wong[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Rita W Y Ng[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Eugene Y K Tso[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Tracy Ho[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Kitty S C Fung[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Siu T Ng[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Barry K C Wong[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Siaw S Boon[SUP] 1 [/SUP], David S C Hui[SUP] 2 3 [/SUP], Paul K S Chan[SUP] 1 3 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Background: Self-collected specimens has been advocated to avoid infectious exposure to healthcare workers. Self-induced sputum in those with a productive cough, and saliva in those without a productive cough have been proposed, but sensitivity remains uncertain.
Methods: We performed a prospective study in two regional hospitals in Hong Kong.
Results: We prospectively examined 563 serial samples collected during the virus shedding periods of 50 patients: 150 deep-throat saliva (DTS), 309 pooled-nasopharyngeal (NP) and throat swabs, and 104 sputum. DTS had the lowest overall RT-PCR positive rate (68.7% vs. 89.4% [sputum] and 80.9% [pooled NP and throat swabs]), and the lowest viral RNA concentration (mean log copy/mL 3.54 vs. 5.03 [sputum] and 4.63 [pooled NP and throat swabs]). Analyses with respect to time from symptom onset and severity also revealed similar results. Virus yield of DTS correlated with that of sputum (Pearson correlation index [95% CI]: 0.76 [0.62 - 0.86]). We estimated the overall false-negative rate of DTS could be 31.3%, and increased 2.7 times among patients without sputum.
Conclusion: DTS produced the lowest viral RNA concentration and RT-PCR positive rate compared to conventional respiratory specimens in all phases of illness. Self-collect sputum should be the choice for patients with sputum.

Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; coronavirus; diagnosis; novel infectious disease; saliva.
 
Back
Top Bottom