Centre for Human Virology and Genomics, Microbiology Department, Nigerian Institute of Medical Research, Yaba, Lagos, Nigeria.
Biochemistry Department, Nigerian Institute of Medical Research, Yaba, Lagos, Nigeria.
PLoS One. 2021 Jun 10;16(6):e0252611. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252611. eCollection 2021.
The present global pandemic triggered by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has lingered for over a year in its devastating effects. Diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is currently established with a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test by means of oropharyngeal-, nasopharyngeal-, anal-swabs, sputum and blood plasma. However, oral and nasal swabs are more commonly used. This study, therefore, assessed sensitivity and specificity of plasma as a diagnostic in comparison with a combination of oral and nasal swab samples, and the implications for blood transfusion. Oropharyngeal (OP) and nasopharyngeal (NP) swab samples were obtained from 125 individuals suspected to have COVID-19 and stored in viral transport medium (VTM) tubes. Ten millilitres of blood samples in EDTA were also obtained by venepuncture and spun to obtain plasma. Viral RNA was obtained from both swabs and plasma by manual extraction with Qiagen QIAamp viral RNA Mini Kit. Detection was done using a real time fluorescent RT-qPCR BGI kit, on a QuantStudio 3 real-time PCR instrument. Average age of study participants was 41 years, with 74 (59.2%) being male. Out of the 125 individuals tested for COVID-19, 75 (60%) were positive by OP/NP swab. However, only 6 (4.8%) had a positive plasma result for COVID-19 with median Ct value of 32.4. Sensitivity and specificity of RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 test using plasma was 8% and 100% respectively. There was no false positive recorded, but 69 (55.2%) false negatives were obtained by plasma. SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA was detected, albeit low (4.8%) in plasma. Plasma is likely not a suitable biological sample to diagnose acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. The implication of transfusing blood in this era of COVID-19 needs further investigations.
由严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)引发的当前全球大流行已经肆虐了一年多。目前,通过聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测,通过口咽、鼻咽、肛门拭子、痰液和血浆来诊断 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)。然而,口腔和鼻腔拭子更为常用。因此,本研究评估了血浆作为诊断方法的敏感性和特异性,与口腔和鼻腔拭子样本的组合相比,并评估了对输血的影响。从 125 名疑似 COVID-19 的个体中获得口咽(OP)和鼻咽(NP)拭子样本,并储存在病毒运输培养基(VTM)管中。通过静脉穿刺获得 10 毫升 EDTA 血液样本,并旋转以获得血浆。通过手动提取 Qiagen QIAamp 病毒 RNA 迷你试剂盒从拭子和血浆中获得病毒 RNA。使用 BGI 实时荧光 RT-qPCR 试剂盒在 QuantStudio 3 实时 PCR 仪器上进行检测。研究参与者的平均年龄为 41 岁,其中 74 人(59.2%)为男性。在 125 名接受 COVID-19 检测的个体中,75 人(60%)的 OP/NP 拭子检测结果为阳性。然而,只有 6 人(4.8%)的 COVID-19 血浆检测结果为阳性,Ct 值中位数为 32.4。使用血浆的 RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 检测的敏感性和特异性分别为 8%和 100%。没有记录到假阳性,但通过血浆获得了 69 个(55.2%)假阴性。虽然含量低(4.8%),但仍在血浆中检测到 SARS-CoV-2 病毒 RNA。血浆不太可能成为诊断急性 SARS-CoV-2 感染的合适生物样本。在 COVID-19 时代,输血的影响需要进一步研究。