Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mouth Washing Impaired SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Saliva.
Costa, Monique Melo; Benoit, Nicolas; Tissot-Dupont, Hervé; Million, Matthieu; Pradines, Bruno; Granjeaud, Samuel; Almeras, Lionel.
  • Costa MM; Unité de Parasitologie et Entomologie, Département de Microbiologie et Maladies Infectieuses, Institut de Recherche Biomédicale des Armées, 13005 Marseille, France.
  • Benoit N; Aix Marseille Univ, IRD, SSA, AP-HM, VITROME, 13005 Marseille, France.
  • Tissot-Dupont H; IHU Méditerranée Infection, 13005 Marseille, France.
  • Million M; Unité de Parasitologie et Entomologie, Département de Microbiologie et Maladies Infectieuses, Institut de Recherche Biomédicale des Armées, 13005 Marseille, France.
  • Pradines B; Aix Marseille Univ, IRD, SSA, AP-HM, VITROME, 13005 Marseille, France.
  • Granjeaud S; IHU Méditerranée Infection, 13005 Marseille, France.
  • Almeras L; Centre National de Référence du Paludisme, 13005 Marseille, France.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 11(8)2021 Aug 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1367805
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

A previous study demonstrated the performance of the Salivette® (SARSTEDT, Numbrecht, Germany) as a homogeneous saliva collection system to diagnose COVID-19 by RT-qPCR, notably for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. However, for convalescent patients, the corroboration of molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 in paired nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) and saliva samples was unsatisfactory.

OBJECTIVES:

The aim of the present work was to assess the concordance level of SARS-CoV-2 detection between paired sampling of NPSs and saliva collected with Salivette® at two time points, with ten days of interval.

RESULTS:

A total of 319 paired samples from 145 outpatients (OP) and 51 healthcare workers (HW) were collected. Unfortunately, at day ten, 73 individuals were lost to follow-up, explaining some kinetic missing data. Due to significant waiting rates at hospitals, most of the patients ate and/or drank while waiting for their turn. Consequently, mouth washing was systematically proposed prior to saliva collection. None of the HW were diagnosed as SARS-CoV-2 positive using NPS or saliva specimens at both time points (n = 95) by RT-qPCR. The virus was detected in 56.3% (n = 126/224) of the NPS samples from OP, but solely 26.8% (n = 60/224) of the paired saliva specimens. The detection of the internal cellular control, the human RNase P, in more than 98% of the saliva samples, underlined that the low sensitivity of saliva specimens (45.2%) for SARS-CoV-2 detection was not attributed to an improper saliva sample storing or RNA extraction.

CONCLUSIONS:

This work revealed that mouth washing decreased viral load of buccal cavity conducting to impairment of SARS-CoV-2 detection. Viral loads in saliva neo-produced appeared insufficient for molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2. At the time when saliva tests could be a rapid, simple and non-invasive strategy to assess large scale schoolchildren in France, the determination of the performance of saliva collection becomes imperative to standardize procedures.
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Cohort study / Diagnostic study / Prognostic study Language: English Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Diagnostics11081509

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Cohort study / Diagnostic study / Prognostic study Language: English Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Diagnostics11081509