The Ability to Detect the COVID-19 Genome Using Saliva Swabs in Comparison with Nasopharyngeal Swabs in Baghdad

A. Alkaisi, Y. M. Abdul-Lateef, Salma Burhan Abdo
{"title":"The Ability to Detect the COVID-19 Genome Using Saliva Swabs in Comparison with Nasopharyngeal Swabs in Baghdad","authors":"A. Alkaisi, Y. M. Abdul-Lateef, Salma Burhan Abdo","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1778700","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Objective Nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) sampling has been recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, and real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT–PCR) is used to detect SARS-CoV- 2, the causative agent of COVID-19. This sampling technique is invasive and causes discomfort to the patient. Saliva swabs (SSs) can be used as an alternative noninvasive method; however, there are limited data confirming its suitability for the diagnosis of COVID-19. The aim of this study was to test the ability to detect COVID-19 using SSs in comparison with NPSs in the Baghdad Alkark sector.\n Materials and Methods Six hundred and fifty patients were included in this study, and written informed consent was obtained from all the study participants. Paired NPSs and SSs were collected at the same time from each participant between days 3 and 5 after disease initiation. SSs were taken from the sublingual area. An RT‒PCR assay was used to detect the viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) of SARS-CoV-2 for the diagnosis of COVID-19. The chi-squared test was used for data analysis, with p < 0.05 considered significant.\n Results Out of 650 participants with suspected COVID-19 (313 males and 145 females), 313 were confirmed to be positive for COVID-19 by quantitative RT–PCR (RT‒qPCR) using both samples. The ages ranged between 12 and 85 years, with a mean/standard deviation (SD) of 45.45 (16.62) years. All the cases with positive results using NPSs were also positive when SSs were used. Statistically, there was no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.347).\n Conclusion RT‒PCR assays conducted on SSs and NPSs performed similarly, indicating that SSs may be a safe, inexpensive diagnostic sampling method and an effective tool for population screening. We recommend more studies to support this finding.","PeriodicalId":502477,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of General Dentistry","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of General Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1778700","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective Nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) sampling has been recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, and real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT–PCR) is used to detect SARS-CoV- 2, the causative agent of COVID-19. This sampling technique is invasive and causes discomfort to the patient. Saliva swabs (SSs) can be used as an alternative noninvasive method; however, there are limited data confirming its suitability for the diagnosis of COVID-19. The aim of this study was to test the ability to detect COVID-19 using SSs in comparison with NPSs in the Baghdad Alkark sector. Materials and Methods Six hundred and fifty patients were included in this study, and written informed consent was obtained from all the study participants. Paired NPSs and SSs were collected at the same time from each participant between days 3 and 5 after disease initiation. SSs were taken from the sublingual area. An RT‒PCR assay was used to detect the viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) of SARS-CoV-2 for the diagnosis of COVID-19. The chi-squared test was used for data analysis, with p < 0.05 considered significant. Results Out of 650 participants with suspected COVID-19 (313 males and 145 females), 313 were confirmed to be positive for COVID-19 by quantitative RT–PCR (RT‒qPCR) using both samples. The ages ranged between 12 and 85 years, with a mean/standard deviation (SD) of 45.45 (16.62) years. All the cases with positive results using NPSs were also positive when SSs were used. Statistically, there was no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.347). Conclusion RT‒PCR assays conducted on SSs and NPSs performed similarly, indicating that SSs may be a safe, inexpensive diagnostic sampling method and an effective tool for population screening. We recommend more studies to support this finding.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
巴格达使用唾液拭子和鼻咽拭子检测 COVID-19 基因组的能力比较
自 COVID-19 大流行开始以来,世界卫生组织(WHO)一直建议进行鼻咽拭子采样,并使用实时反转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)来检测 COVID-19 的病原体 SARS-CoV- 2。这种采样技术是侵入性的,会给病人带来不适。唾液拭子(SSs)可作为一种非侵入性的替代方法,但目前证实其适用于诊断 COVID-19 的数据有限。本研究旨在测试巴格达阿尔卡克地区使用唾液拭子和非侵入性唾液拭子检测 COVID-19 的能力。材料和方法 本研究共纳入六百五十名患者,并获得了所有参与者的书面知情同意。在发病后的第 3 至 5 天,同时采集每位参与者的配对 NPS 和 SS。SS 取自舌下部位。采用 RT-PCR 法检测 SARS-CoV-2 的病毒核糖核酸 (RNA),以诊断 COVID-19。数据分析采用卡方检验,P < 0.05 为显著。结果 在 650 名疑似 COVID-19 患者(男性 313 人,女性 145 人)中,有 313 人通过使用两份样本进行定量 RT-PCR (RT-qPCR),证实 COVID-19 阳性。他们的年龄从 12 岁到 85 岁不等,平均/标准差 (SD) 为 45.45 (16.62)岁。所有使用 NPSs 检测结果呈阳性的病例在使用 SSs 检测时也呈阳性。从统计学角度看,两组之间没有明显差异(P = 0.347)。结论 在 SSs 和 NPSs 上进行的 RT-PCR 检测结果相似,表明 SSs 可能是一种安全、廉价的诊断采样方法,也是一种有效的人群筛查工具。我们建议开展更多研究来支持这一发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Orthodontic and Surgical Management of Impacted Maxillary Canines: A Narrative Review Advancing Environmental Sustainability in Dentistry and Oral Health Evaluation of Volumetric Changes between Pediatric Rotary Files and Manual Files during Canal Preparation of Primary Mandibular Canine: A Nano-CT Analysis The Impact of COVID-19 Fatigue and Pandemic Burnout alongside Academic Stress on the Gingival Health of Dental Students Tanaka and Johnston Space Analysis: Does It Apply to All Populations?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1