Institute of Microbiology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausannegrid.9851.5, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Occupational Health Service, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Microbiol Spectr. 2022 Dec 21;10(6):e0392322. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.03923-22. Epub 2022 Nov 8.
In November 2021, the World Health Organization declared the Omicron variant (B.1.1.519) a variant of concern. Since then, worries have been expressed regarding the ability of usual diagnostic tests to detect the Omicron variant. In addition, some recently published data suggested that the salivary reverse transcription (RT)-PCR might perform better than the current gold standard, nasopharyngeal (NP) RT-PCR. In this study, we aimed to compare the sensitivities of nasopharyngeal and saliva RT-PCR and assess the diagnostic performances of rapid antigen testing (RAT) in nasopharyngeal and saliva samples. We conducted a prospective clinical study among symptomatic health care professionals consulting the occupational health service of our hospital for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) screening and hospitalized patients in internal medicine/intensive care wards screened for SARS-CoV-2 with COVID-19-compatible symptoms. A composite outcome considering NP PCR and/or saliva PCR was used as a reference standard to define COVID-19 cases. A total of 475 paired NP/saliva specimens have been collected with a positivity rate of 40% ( = 192). NP and salivary RT-PCR exhibited sensitivities of 98% (95% CI, 94 to 99%) and 87% (95% CI, 81 to 91%), respectively, for outpatients ( = 453) and 94% (95% CI, 72 to 99%) and 69% (95% CI, 44 to 86%), respectively, for hospitalized patients ( = 22). Nasopharyngeal rapid antigen testing exhibited much lower diagnostic performances (sensitivity of 66% and 31% for outpatients and inpatients, respectively), while saliva RAT showed a sensitivity of less than 5% in both groups. Nasopharyngeal RT-PCR testing remains the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant screening. Salivary RT-PCR can be used as an alternative in case of contraindication to perform NP sampling. The use of RAT should be limited to settings where access to molecular diagnostic methods is lacking. The Omicron variant of concern spread rapidly since it was first reported in November 2021 and currently accounts for the vast majority of new infections worldwide. Recent reports suggest that saliva sampling might outweigh nasopharyngeal sampling for the diagnosis of the Omicron variant. Nevertheless, data investigating the best diagnostic strategy specifically for the Omicron variant of concern remain scarce. This study fills this gap in current knowledge and elucidates the question of which strategy to use in which patient. It provides a new basis for further improving COVID-19 screening programs and managing patients suspected to have COVID-19.
2021 年 11 月,世界卫生组织宣布奥密克戎变异株(B.1.1.519)为值得关注的变异株。此后,人们对常规诊断检测识别奥密克戎变异株的能力表示担忧。此外,一些最近发表的数据表明,唾液逆转录(RT)-PCR 可能比目前的金标准鼻咽(NP)RT-PCR 表现更好。在这项研究中,我们旨在比较鼻咽和唾液 RT-PCR 的敏感性,并评估快速抗原检测(RAT)在鼻咽和唾液样本中的诊断性能。我们对因严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)筛查而咨询我院职业健康服务的有症状的卫生保健专业人员和因 COVID-19 症状而在内科/重症监护病房住院的患者进行了一项前瞻性临床研究。将考虑 NP PCR 和/或唾液 PCR 的组合结果作为参考标准来定义 COVID-19 病例。共收集了 475 对 NP/唾液标本,阳性率为 40%( = 192)。NP 和唾液 RT-PCR 对门诊患者( = 453)的敏感性分别为 98%(95%CI,94 至 99%)和 87%(95%CI,81 至 91%),对住院患者( = 22)的敏感性分别为 94%(95%CI,72 至 99%)和 69%(95%CI,44 至 86%)。鼻咽快速抗原检测的诊断性能较低(门诊患者和住院患者的敏感性分别为 66%和 31%),而唾液 RAT 在两组中的敏感性均低于 5%。鼻咽 RT-PCR 检测仍然是 SARS-CoV-2 奥密克戎变异株筛查的金标准。在不能进行 NP 采样的情况下,唾液 RT-PCR 可作为替代方法。RAT 的使用应限于分子诊断方法不可及的地方。自 2021 年 11 月首次报告以来,令人担忧的奥密克戎变异株迅速传播,目前占全球绝大多数新感染病例。最近的报告表明,唾液采样可能比鼻咽采样更适合奥密克戎变异株的诊断。然而,专门针对奥密克戎变异株的最佳诊断策略的数据仍然很少。本研究填补了这一知识空白,并阐明了在何种患者中使用何种策略的问题。它为进一步改进 COVID-19 筛查计划和管理疑似 COVID-19 患者提供了新的依据。