4.7 Article

Prospective Study Comparing Deep Throat Saliva With Other Respiratory Tract Specimens in the Diagnosis of Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 222, Issue 10, Pages 1612-1619

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiaa487

Keywords

coronavirus; COVID-19; diagnosis; saliva; SARS-CoV-2

Funding

  1. Health and Medical Research Fund-Commissioned Research on the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) from the Food and Health Bureau, Hong Kong SAR Government [COVID190107]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Self-collected specimens have 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 2 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. Deep throat saliva had the lowest overall reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-positive rate (68.7% vs 89.4% [sputum] and 80.9% [pooled NP and throat swabs]) and the lowest viral ribonucleic acid (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 yields of DTS correlated with that of sputum (Pearson correlation index 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.86). We estimated that the overall false-negative rate of DTS could be as high as 31.3% and increased 2.7 times among patients without sputum. Conclusions. Deep throat saliva produced the lowest viral RNA concentration and RT-PCR-positive rate compared with conventional respiratory specimens in all phases of illness. Self-collected sputum should be the choice for patients with sputum.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available