Your browser doesn't support javascript.
SARS-COV-2 detection in saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs using RT-PCR was similar.
Guimarães, Taísa Coelho; Marques, Barbara Bruno Fagundes; Tinoco, Justine Monteiro Monnerat; Porto, Luís Cristóvão Moraes Sobrino; Tinoco, Eduardo Muniz Barretto; Fischer, Ricardo Guimarães.
  • Guimarães TC; Department of Periodontology, Rio de Janeiro State University, Brazil.
  • Marques BBF; Department of Periodontology, Rio de Janeiro State University, Brazil.
  • Tinoco JMM; Department of Endodontic, Rio de Janeiro Federal University, Brazil.
  • Porto LCMS; Histocompatibility and Cryopreservation Laboratory, Rio de Janeiro State University, Brazil.
  • Tinoco EMB; Clinical Pathology Service, Piquet Carneiro Policlinic, Rio de Janeiro State University, Brazil.
  • Fischer RG; Department of Periodontology, Rio de Janeiro State University, Brazil.
Braz Dent J ; 33(2): 68-72, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1833813
ABSTRACT
The World Health Organization has declared the widespread spread of SARS-CoV-2 and its associated disease (COVID-19) a public health emergency. The standard gold test for detecting the virus is the RT-PCR, performed from nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) samples. However, this test may be uncomfortable for the patient and requires specific training and attire from the health professional responsible for collecting the sample. Therefore, the search for alternative ways to collect samples that may be used in the diagnosis of COVID-19 is relevant. This study aimed to compare the results obtained from NPS and saliva samples. NPS and saliva samples were collected from 189 symptomatic outpatients suspected of COVID-19, who came to Piquet Carneiro Polyclinic. RNA extraction was performed using the Bio-Gene DNA/RNA Viral Extraction kit (Bioclin®). Real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) reactions used the Molecular SARS-CoV-2 (E / RP) kit (Bio-Manguinhos). The results indicated that 142 showed a non-detectable result (ND), while 47 showed a detectable result (D). Among the 142 "ND", 137 (94.4%) saliva samples obtained the same result, while 5 samples (3.4%) were "D". Among the 47 "D" swab samples, 35 (74.4%) showed the same result in the saliva samples. The sensitivity of the saliva test was 0.74 and the specificity was 0.97. The positive predictive value was 0.88 while the negative predictive value was 0.92. The results showed that detection of Sars-CoV-2 using saliva samples showed high sensitivity and specificity compared to nasopharyngeal swabs.
Subject(s)

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Prognostic study Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Braz Dent J Journal subject: Dentistry Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: 0103-6440202204591

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Prognostic study Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Braz Dent J Journal subject: Dentistry Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: 0103-6440202204591