Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
PLoS One ; 17(9): e0275201, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2054361

ABSTRACT

Molecular diagnostic testing has played a critical role in the global response to the novel Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, since its first outbreak in late 2019. At the inception of the COVID-19 pandemic, nasopharyngeal swab sample analysis for COVID-19 diagnosis using the real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) technique was the most widely used. However, due to the high cost and difficulty of sample collection, the number of available sample types for COVID-19 diagnosis is rapidly increasing, as is the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. The use of nasal swabs, saliva, and oral fluids as viable sample options for the effective detection of SARS-CoV-2 has been implemented successfully in different settings since 2020. These alternative sample type provides a plethora of advantages including decreasing the high exposure risk to frontline workers, enhancing the chances of home self-sampling, reducing the cost, and significantly increasing testing capacity. This study sought to ascertain the effectiveness of Saliva samples as an alternative for COVID-19 diagnosis in Nigeria. Demographic data, paired samples of Nasopharyngeal Swab and Drooling Saliva were obtained from 309 consenting individuals aged 8-83 years presenting for COVID-19 testing. All samples were simultaneously assayed for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RdRp, N, and E genes using the GeneFinder™ COVID-19 Plus RT-PCR test kit. Out of 309 participants, only 299 with valid RT-PCR results comprising 159 (53.2%) males and 140 (46.8%) females were analyzed in this study using the R Statistical package. Among the 299 samples analyzed, 39 (13.0%) had SARS-CoV-2 detected in at least one specimen type. Both swabs and saliva were positive in 20 (51.3%) participants. Ten participants (25.6%) had swab positive/saliva-negative results and 9 participants (23.1%) had saliva positive/swab-negative results. The percentage of positive and negative agreement of the saliva samples with the nasopharyngeal swab were 67% and 97% respectively with positive and negative predictive values as 69% and 96% respectively. The findings indicate that drooling saliva samples have good and comparable diagnostic accuracy to the nasopharyngeal swabs with moderate sensitivities and high specificities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Sialorrhea , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Female , Humans , Male , Nasopharynx , Pandemics , RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Saliva , Specimen Handling/methods
2.
PLoS One ; 16(1): e0243271, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1024411

ABSTRACT

In an outbreak, effective detection of the aetiological agent(s) involved using molecular techniques is key to efficient diagnosis, early prevention and management of the spread. However, sequencing is necessary for mutation monitoring and tracking of clusters of transmission, development of diagnostics and for vaccines and drug development. Many sequencing methods are fast evolving to reduce test turn-around-time and to increase through-put compared to Sanger sequencing method; however, Sanger sequencing remains the gold standard for clinical research sequencing with its 99.99% accuracy This study sought to generate sequence data of SARS-CoV-2 using Sanger sequencing method and to characterize them for possible site(s) of mutations. About 30 pairs of primers were designed, synthesized, and optimized using endpoint PCR to generate amplicons for the full length of the virus. Cycle sequencing using BigDye Terminator v.3.1 and capillary gel electrophoresis on ABI 3130xl genetic analyser were performed according to the manufacturers' instructions. The sequence data generated were assembled and analysed for variations using DNASTAR Lasergene 17 SeqMan Ultra. Total length of 29,760bp of SARS-CoV-2 was assembled from the sample analysed and deposited in GenBank with accession number: MT576584. Blast result of the sequence assembly shows a 99.97% identity with the reference sequence. Variations were noticed at positions: nt201, nt2997, nt14368, nt16535, nt20334, and nt28841-28843, which caused amino acid alterations at the S (aa614) and N (aa203-204) regions. The mutations observed at S and N-gene in this study may be indicative of a gradual changes in the genetic coding of the virus hence, the need for active surveillance of the viral genome.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/virology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Base Sequence , COVID-19/epidemiology , Genome, Viral , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing , Humans , Nigeria/epidemiology , Phylogeny , RNA, Viral/genetics , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL