A comparative study of SARS-COV-2 nucleic acid assay for nasal swab and sputum samples

Pan Dong-ming, Lin Jing-yan, Zhang Jie-yun, Yang Qian-ting, Wang Yan-rong, Wang Xian-feng, Zhang Mingxia
{"title":"A comparative study of SARS-COV-2 nucleic acid assay for nasal swab and sputum samples","authors":"Pan Dong-ming, Lin Jing-yan, Zhang Jie-yun, Yang Qian-ting, Wang Yan-rong, Wang Xian-feng, Zhang Mingxia","doi":"10.13604/J.CNKI.46-1064/R.2021.02.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective To analyze nucleic acid detection results of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients' nasal swabs and sputum specimens, and we provide reference for clinical sampling methods. Methods Totally 170 times of matched nasal swabs and sputum specimens of 78 COVID-19 patients in Shenzhen Third People's Hospital were collected from the same day. The samples were tested with real-time fluorescence PCR nucleic acid. The nasal swabs and sputum samples were analyzed and compared. Results A total of 78 patients were involved, including 33 males and 45 females. Age ranged 1-86 years old, the majority of young and middle-aged (20-<60 years, 59.0%) patients, followed by elderly patients (≥ 60 years, 33.0%), 4 children. Among 170 matched samples, 59 nasal swabs were positive, the positive rate was 34.7%; 79 sputum samples were positive, the positive rate was 46.5%, the difference was statistically significant ( P <0.01). There were 46 times of positive nasal swabs and sputum specimens simultaneously. The results showed that the Ct value of 27 sputum samples was lower than that of nasal swabs (58.7%), 17 sputum samples were higher than that of nasal swabs (37.0%), and 2 sputum samples were equal to that of nasal swabs (4.3%). This suggested a higher viral load in sputum specimens than in nose swabs. Conclusion In the nucleic acid assay of COVID-19 patients, the positive rate of sputum specimens is higher than that of nasal swabs, and the rate of missing detection is low. The viral load of sputum specimens is higher than that of nasal swabs, which is more conducive to the detection of viral nucleic acids, and patients are more receptive. 摘要:目的 分析新型冠状病毒肺炎(coranavims disease 2019, COVID-19)患者鼻拭子和痰标本病毒核酸检测结 果, 为临床采样方式的选择提供参考依据。 方法 收集深圳市第三人民医院新型冠状病毒肺炎78例患者共170例次 同一天鼻拭子与痰配对标本, 进行实时荧光PCR核酸检测, 分析比较鼻拭子和痰标本检测情况。 结果 78例患者中男 性33例, 女性45例, 年龄1∼86岁, 中青年(20∼<60岁) 患者居多 (占59.0%), 其次为老年(≥60岁) 患者 (占33.0%), 4例 为儿童。170例次配对标本中, 鼻拭子和痰标本核酸阳性的阳性率分别为34.7%(59/170)和46.5%(79/170), 差异有统 计学意义( P <0.01)。鼻拭子和痰标本同时阳性共46例次, 结果显示27例痰标本Ct值低于鼻拭子Ct值 (占58.7%), 17 例痰标本Ct值高于鼻拭子Ct值 (占37.0%), 2例痰标本Ct值等于鼻拭子Ct值 (占4.3%), 提示痰标本的病毒载量比鼻拭 子的病毒载量更高。 结论 在新型冠状病毒肺炎患者病毒核酸检测中, 痰标本的阳性率高于鼻拭子标本, 且漏检率低, 痰标本的病毒载量比鼻拭子的病毒载量更高, 更有利于病毒核酸的检出, 同时患者更易接受, 建议有痰患者优先采集 痰标本。","PeriodicalId":10045,"journal":{"name":"中国热带医学","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中国热带医学","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13604/J.CNKI.46-1064/R.2021.02.13","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 To analyze nucleic acid detection results of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients' nasal swabs and sputum specimens, and we provide reference for clinical sampling methods. Methods Totally 170 times of matched nasal swabs and sputum specimens of 78 COVID-19 patients in Shenzhen Third People's Hospital were collected from the same day. The samples were tested with real-time fluorescence PCR nucleic acid. The nasal swabs and sputum samples were analyzed and compared. Results A total of 78 patients were involved, including 33 males and 45 females. Age ranged 1-86 years old, the majority of young and middle-aged (20-<60 years, 59.0%) patients, followed by elderly patients (≥ 60 years, 33.0%), 4 children. Among 170 matched samples, 59 nasal swabs were positive, the positive rate was 34.7%; 79 sputum samples were positive, the positive rate was 46.5%, the difference was statistically significant ( P <0.01). There were 46 times of positive nasal swabs and sputum specimens simultaneously. The results showed that the Ct value of 27 sputum samples was lower than that of nasal swabs (58.7%), 17 sputum samples were higher than that of nasal swabs (37.0%), and 2 sputum samples were equal to that of nasal swabs (4.3%). This suggested a higher viral load in sputum specimens than in nose swabs. Conclusion In the nucleic acid assay of COVID-19 patients, the positive rate of sputum specimens is higher than that of nasal swabs, and the rate of missing detection is low. The viral load of sputum specimens is higher than that of nasal swabs, which is more conducive to the detection of viral nucleic acids, and patients are more receptive. 摘要:目的 分析新型冠状病毒肺炎(coranavims disease 2019, COVID-19)患者鼻拭子和痰标本病毒核酸检测结 果, 为临床采样方式的选择提供参考依据。 方法 收集深圳市第三人民医院新型冠状病毒肺炎78例患者共170例次 同一天鼻拭子与痰配对标本, 进行实时荧光PCR核酸检测, 分析比较鼻拭子和痰标本检测情况。 结果 78例患者中男 性33例, 女性45例, 年龄1∼86岁, 中青年(20∼<60岁) 患者居多 (占59.0%), 其次为老年(≥60岁) 患者 (占33.0%), 4例 为儿童。170例次配对标本中, 鼻拭子和痰标本核酸阳性的阳性率分别为34.7%(59/170)和46.5%(79/170), 差异有统 计学意义( P <0.01)。鼻拭子和痰标本同时阳性共46例次, 结果显示27例痰标本Ct值低于鼻拭子Ct值 (占58.7%), 17 例痰标本Ct值高于鼻拭子Ct值 (占37.0%), 2例痰标本Ct值等于鼻拭子Ct值 (占4.3%), 提示痰标本的病毒载量比鼻拭 子的病毒载量更高。 结论 在新型冠状病毒肺炎患者病毒核酸检测中, 痰标本的阳性率高于鼻拭子标本, 且漏检率低, 痰标本的病毒载量比鼻拭子的病毒载量更高, 更有利于病毒核酸的检出, 同时患者更易接受, 建议有痰患者优先采集 痰标本。
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
鼻拭子与痰液中SARS-COV-2核酸检测的比较研究
目的分析2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)患者鼻拭子和痰标本的核酸检测结果,为临床取样方法提供参考。方法收集深圳市第三人民医院当日收治的78例新冠肺炎患者170份匹配鼻拭子和痰标本。采用实时荧光PCR核酸检测。对鼻拭子和痰液样本进行分析比较。结果共纳入78例患者,其中男性33例,女性45例。年龄范围1 ~ 86岁,以中青年(20 ~ <60岁,59.0%)患者居多,其次为老年(≥60岁,33.0%),儿童4例。170份匹配样本中鼻拭子阳性59份,阳性率为34.7%;痰液标本阳性79份,阳性率46.5%,差异有统计学意义(P <0.01)。鼻拭子和痰标本同时呈阳性46次。结果显示,27份痰液Ct值低于鼻拭子(58.7%),17份痰液Ct值高于鼻拭子(37.0%),2份痰液Ct值与鼻拭子相等(4.3%)。这表明痰标本中的病毒载量高于鼻拭子。结论在COVID-19患者核酸检测中,痰标本阳性率高于鼻拭子阳性率,漏检率较低。痰标本的病毒载量高于鼻拭子,更有利于病毒核酸的检测,患者接受度更高。摘要:目的分析新型冠状病毒肺炎(2019年coranavims疾病,COVID-19)患者鼻拭子和痰标本病毒核酸检测结果,为临床采样方式的选择提供参考依据。方法收集深圳市第三人民医院新型冠状病毒肺炎78例患者共170例次同一天鼻拭子与痰配对标本,进行实时荧光PCR核酸检测,分析比较鼻拭子和痰标本检测情况。结果78例患者中男性33例,女性45例,年龄1∼86岁,中青年(20∼< 60岁)患者居多(占59.0%),其次为老年(≥60岁)患者(占33.0%),4例为儿童。170例次配对标本中,鼻拭子和痰标本核酸阳性的阳性率分别为34.7%(59/170)和46.5%(79/170),差异有统计学意义(P < 0.01)。鼻拭子和痰标本同时阳性共46例次,结果显示27例痰标本Ct值低于鼻拭子Ct值(占58.7%),17例痰标本Ct值高于鼻拭子Ct值(占37.0%),2例痰标本Ct值等于鼻拭子Ct值(占4.3%),提示痰标本的病毒载量比鼻拭子的病毒载量更高。结论 在新型冠状病毒肺炎患者病毒核酸检测中, 痰标本的阳性率高于鼻拭子标本, 且漏检率低, 痰标本的病毒载量比鼻拭子的病毒载量更高, 更有利于病毒核酸的检出, 同时患者更易接受, 建议有痰患者优先采集 痰标本。
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13927
期刊介绍: China Tropical Medicine, was approved by the Ministry of Science and Technology in 2001, is the only tropical medicine periodical under the charge of the National Health Commission of China. It’s organized by Hainan Provincial Center for Disease Prevention and Control, and Chinese Preventive Medicine Association. The journal is indexed by the following database: Scopus database, Embase database, EBSCO Database, The Western Pacific Region index medicus (WPRIM), American Chemical Abstracts (CA), International Centre for Agricultural and Biological Sciences Research Database (CABI), Global Health Database, Database of the Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, China Science and Technology Core Journals, China Core Journals (Selection) Database, Database of Chinese Biomedical Literature, Comprehensive Evaluation Database of Chinese Academic Journals, CAJCD Code of Conduct Excellent Journal, Database of Chinese SCI-Tech Periodicals, China Journal Full Text Database.
期刊最新文献
薰衣草挥发油体外抑菌作用及皮肤过敏性研究 海南省血红扇头蜱不同发育阶段形态电镜观察 液相色谱-串联质谱法快速筛查食物中毒样本中28种生物碱 Two foodborne disease outbreaks caused by Salmonella putten Genetic polymorphisms of interluekin-17A gene in Black-clothes Zhuang population in Guangxi
×
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