• 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.

Oral Dis . Validity and reliability of immunochromatographic IgM/IgG rapid tests for COVID-19 salivary diagnosis

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Oral Dis


. 2021 Oct 25.
doi: 10.1111/odi.14059. Online ahead of print.
Validity and reliability of immunochromatographic IgM/IgG rapid tests for COVID-19 salivary diagnosis


Ana Carolina Serafim Vilela[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Camila Alves Costa[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Suzane Aparecida Oliveira[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Menira Borges Lima Dias Souza[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Fabiola Souza Fiaccadori[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Cláudio Rodrigues Leles[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Nádia Lago Costa[SUP] 1 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the accuracy of three immunochromatographic rapid tests for salivary detection of immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antigens and the reliability of these tests comparing saliva with plasma samples.
Materials and methods: Plasma and saliva samples from 62 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and 20 healthy volunteers were assayed. IgM/IgG antibody against SARS-COV-2 was detected using three immunochromatographic rapid tests and compared with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR).
Results: The tests' overall accuracy for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies ranged from 75.6 to 79.3 for saliva and 86.6 to 87.8 for plasma tests. The sensitivity of saliva and plasma tests increased with the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) signs and symptoms. The chance of a positive plasma test in participants with a positive qRT-PCR test was 2.27 greater than a positive saliva test.
Conclusions: Although rapid immunochromatographic tests are more accurate using plasma than saliva, which was expected considering its original use, our findings support the use of saliva as a straightforward supplementary method to assess seroconversion in patients with COVID-19, with important sensitivity and sensibility, especially in severe and critical cases.

Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-Cov-2; Saliva; immunoglobulin G; immunoglobulin M.
 
Back
Top Bottom