Lejisa Tadesse, Ambachew Rozina, Bikila Demiraw, Bashea Chala, Abdeta Abera, Chala Dawit, Dejene Natnael, Tola Habteyes Hailu, Hundie Gadissa Bedada
National Laboratories Capacity Building Directorate, Ethiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Microbiology, Immunology and Parasitology, St. Paul's Hospital Millennium Medical College, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Virusdisease. 2024 Dec;35(4):567-576. doi: 10.1007/s13337-024-00892-9. Epub 2024 Nov 9.
Although nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs) are superior to saliva specimens, saliva can be used as an alternative specimen for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. Moreover, studies have reported contradicting findings on whether SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in urine or not. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of NPSs, saliva and urine specimens in suspected COVID-19 patients. We conducted a cross-sectional study among a total of 604 specimens collected from 219 individuals suspected for COVID-19 from February to July 2022. We recruited participants from two COVID-19 isolation and treatment centers in Addis Ababa. We analyzed the specimens by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) with a Cobas 8800 automated system. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 in NPS, saliva, and urine samples was measured by cycle threshold (Ct) values. Descriptive statistics such as frequency, percent, and mean with standard deviation were used to summarize participants characteristics. We conducted chi-square test to compare RT‒PCR results of NPS, saliva and urine specimens. All data was analyzed by SPSS version 27, and the level of significance was set at a value ≤ 0.05. Of the 219 participants, 126 (57.5%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2 either from NPS, saliva, urine or all specimens. The rate of SARS-CoV-2 detection was significantly higher in NPS (53.9%) than in saliva (35.2%; = 0.001) and urine (9.0%; = 0.001) specimens. The percentage of positive agreement between NPS and saliva was 92.2%, while negative agreement was 66.9%. The overall agreement between NPS and saliva was 75.8% (K = 0.53, < 0.001). In addition, there was a significant correlation in Ct values of both ORF1ab and E genes between the paired NPS and saliva specimens. There was significant positive correlation between NPS and saliva specimens Ct values of both ORF1ab and E genes and days from onset of symptoms to specimen collection. SARS-CoV-2 was significantly detected in NPS than in saliva and urine specimens. Although NPS is better for SARS-CoV-2 detection, saliva specimen can be used as an alternative clinical specimen in resource-limited settings where access to swabs is limited. Both saliva and urine could be sources of viral transmission.
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13337-024-00892-9.
尽管鼻咽拭子(NPS)优于唾液样本,但唾液可作为严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)检测的替代样本。此外,关于是否能在尿液中检测到SARS-CoV-2,研究报告的结果相互矛盾。因此,我们旨在评估NPS、唾液和尿液样本在疑似新冠肺炎患者中的诊断效用。我们对2022年2月至7月从219名疑似新冠肺炎患者中采集的共604份样本进行了一项横断面研究。我们从亚的斯亚贝巴的两个新冠肺炎隔离和治疗中心招募了参与者。我们使用Cobas 8800自动化系统通过实时逆转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)分析样本。通过循环阈值(Ct)值测量NPS、唾液和尿液样本中SARS-CoV-2的存在情况。使用频率、百分比以及均值和标准差等描述性统计来总结参与者的特征。我们进行卡方检验以比较NPS、唾液和尿液样本的RT-PCR结果。所有数据均使用SPSS 27版进行分析,显著性水平设定为p值≤0.05。在219名参与者中,126人(57.5%)通过NPS、唾液、尿液或所有样本检测出SARS-CoV-2呈阳性。SARS-CoV-2在NPS中的检测率(53.9%)显著高于唾液(35.2%;p = 0.001)和尿液(9.0%;p = 0.001)样本。NPS与唾液之间的阳性一致性百分比为92.2%,而阴性一致性为66.9%。NPS与唾液之间的总体一致性为75.8%(K = 0.53,p < 0.001)。此外,配对的NPS和唾液样本中ORF1ab和E基因的Ct值存在显著相关性。NPS和唾液样本中ORF1ab和E基因的Ct值与从症状出现到样本采集的天数之间存在显著正相关。SARS-CoV-2在NPS中的检测显著高于唾液和尿液样本。尽管NPS在检测SARS-CoV-2方面更好,但在获取拭子受限的资源有限环境中,唾液样本可作为替代临床样本。唾液和尿液都可能是病毒传播的来源。
在线版本包含可在10.1007/s13337-024-00892-9获取的补充材料。