Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Predictive factors of COVID-19 in patients with negative RT-qPCR.
López de la Iglesia, J; Fernández-Villa, T; Rivero, A; Carvajal, A; Bay Simon, E; Martínez Martínez, M; Argüello, H; Puente, H; Fernández Vázquez, J P.
  • López de la Iglesia J; Especialista en Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria, Centro de salud Condesa, León, Spain.
  • Fernández-Villa T; Grupo de Investigación en Interacciones Gen-Ambiente y Salud (GIIGAS)/Instituto de Biomedicina (IBIOMED), Universidad de León, León, Spain. Electronic address: tferv@unileon.es.
  • Rivero A; Dirección de Enfermería, Gerencia de Atención Primaria del Área de Salud de León, Spain.
  • Carvajal A; Departamento de Sanidad Animal, Universidad de León, León, Spain.
  • Bay Simon E; Residente de cuarto año de medicina familiar y comunitaria, Centro de Salud San Andrés del Rabanedo, León, Spain.
  • Martínez Martínez M; Enfermera de la Gerencia de Atención Primaria, León, Spain.
  • Argüello H; Departamento de Sanidad Animal, Universidad de León, León, Spain.
  • Puente H; Departamento de Sanidad Animal, Universidad de León, León, Spain.
  • Fernández Vázquez JP; Gerencia de Atención Primaria de León, León, Spain.
Semergen ; 46 Suppl 1: 6-11, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-611306
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate the factors associated with false negatives in RT-qPCR in patients with mild-moderate symptoms of COVID-19. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

This was a cross-sectional study that used a random sample of non-hospitalized patients from the primary care management division of the Healthcare Area of Leon (58 RT-qPCR-positive cases and 52 RT-qPCR-negative cases). Information regarding symptoms was collected and all patients were simultaneously tested using two rapid diagnostic tests - RDTs (Combined - cRDT and Differentiated - dRDT). The association between symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 infection was evaluated by non-conditional logistic regression, with estimation of Odds Ratio.

RESULTS:

A total of 110 subjects were studied, 52% of whom were women (mean age 48.2±11.0 years). There were 42.3% of negative RT-qPCRs that were positive in some RDTs. Fever over 38°C (present in 35.5% of cases) and anosmia (present in 41.8%) were the symptoms most associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, a relationship that remained statistically significant in patients with negative RT-qPCR and some positive RDT (aOR=6.64; 95%CI=1.33-33.13 and aOR=19.38; 95% CI=3.69-101.89, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS:

RT-qPCR is the technique of choice in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but it is not exempt from false negatives. Our results show that patients who present mild or moderate symptoms with negative RT-qPCR, but with fever and/or anosmia, should be considered as suspicious cases and should be evaluated with other diagnostic methods.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pneumonia, Viral / Coronavirus Infections / Clinical Laboratory Techniques Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: English Journal: Semergen Year: 2020 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: J.semerg.2020.06.010

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pneumonia, Viral / Coronavirus Infections / Clinical Laboratory Techniques Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: English Journal: Semergen Year: 2020 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: J.semerg.2020.06.010