Your browser doesn't support javascript.
SARS-CoV-2 detection in different respiratory sites: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Mohammadi, Abbas; Esmaeilzadeh, Elmira; Li, Yijia; Bosch, Ronald J; Li, Jonathan Z.
  • Mohammadi A; Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Esmaeilzadeh E; Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Li Y; Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Bosch RJ; Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Li JZ; Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: jli@bwh.harvard.edu.
EBioMedicine ; 59: 102903, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-671129
Preprint
This scientific journal article is probably based on a previously available preprint. It has been identified through a machine matching algorithm, human confirmation is still pending.
See preprint
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2 through respiratory sampling is critical for the prevention of further transmission and the timely initiation of treatment for COVID-19. There is a diverse range of SARS-CoV-2 detection rates in reported studies, with uncertainty as to the optimal sampling strategy for COVID-19 diagnosis and monitoring.

METHODS:

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing respiratory sampling strategies for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The inclusion criteria were studies that assessed at least two respiratory sampling sites (oropharyngeal swab, nasopharyngeal swab, and sputum) in participants with COVID-19. The percentage positive tests were compared between sampling modalities by constructing a Z-test assuming independence and using the standard errors obtained from the random effects meta-analysis.

FINDINGS:

From 1039 total studies, we identified 11 studies that met our inclusion criteria, with SARS-CoV-2 testing results from a total of 3442 respiratory tract specimens. Compared to nasopharyngeal swab sampling, sputum testing resulted in significantly higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection while oropharyngeal swab testing had lower rates of viral RNA detection. Earlier sampling after symptom onset was associated with improved detection rates, but the differences in SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection by sampling method was consistent regardless of the duration of symptoms.

INTERPRETATION:

The results support sputum sampling as a valuable method of COVID-19 diagnosis and monitoring, and highlight the importance of early testing after symptom onset to increase the rates of COVID-19 diagnosis.

FUNDING:

This study was funded in part by the NIH grants U01AI106701 and by the Harvard University for AIDS Research (NIAID 5P30AI060354).
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Oropharynx / Pneumonia, Viral / Sputum / Nasopharynx / Coronavirus Infections / Betacoronavirus Type of study: Diagnostic study / Randomized controlled trials / Reviews / Systematic review/Meta Analysis Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: EBioMedicine Year: 2020 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: J.ebiom.2020.102903

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Oropharynx / Pneumonia, Viral / Sputum / Nasopharynx / Coronavirus Infections / Betacoronavirus Type of study: Diagnostic study / Randomized controlled trials / Reviews / Systematic review/Meta Analysis Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: EBioMedicine Year: 2020 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: J.ebiom.2020.102903