Download This Paper
Preprints with The Lancet is part of SSRN´s First Look, a place where journals identify content of interest prior to publication. Authors have opted in at submission to The Lancet family of journals to post their preprints on Preprints with The Lancet. The usual SSRN checks and a Lancet-specific check for appropriateness and transparency have been applied. Preprints available here are not Lancet publications or necessarily under review with a Lancet journal. These preprints are early stage research papers that have not been peer-reviewed. The findings should not be used for clinical or public health decision making and should not be presented to a lay audience without highlighting that they are preliminary and have not been peer-reviewed. For more information on this collaboration, see the comments published in The Lancet about the trial period, and our decision to make this a permanent offering, or visit The Lancet´s FAQ page, and for any feedback please contact preprints@lancet.com.
Saliva as a Diagnostic Specimen for SARS-CoV-2 by a PCR-Based Assay: A Diagnostic Validity Study
18 Pages Posted: 28 Feb 2020
More...Abstract
Background: An outbreak of a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) that began in Wuhan, has spread rapidly to more than 26 countries. False negative diagnosis of respiratory samples, predominantly nasal or throat swabs, has made diagnoses and control difficult.
Methods: To identify the detection rates in different respiratory sample types, we recruited 65 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and sequentially collected throat swabs, nasal swabs and saliva or sputum, followed by a comparative analysis of quantitative RT-PCR and viral loads.
Results: The median age of COVID-19 patients recruited for the study was 52.5 years (IQR 39.3-61). Fever (83.3%), cough (54.2%) and expectoration (25.0%) were the most common clinical manifestations. The detection rates of sputum (95.65%, 22/23) and saliva (88.09%, 37/42) were significantly higher than in throat swabs (41.54%, 27/65) and nasal swabs (72.31%, 47/65) ( P <0.001). Further, the Ct Value from sputum, saliva and nasal swabs were significantly higher than in throat swabs, whereas no significant difference was observed between sputum and saliva samples.
Conclusions: The detection rate of SARS-CoV-2 is higher in saliva than other respiratory samples. Our results show that saliva and sputum are reliable sample types that can be used to detect SARS-CoV-2, and worthy of clinical promotion. The convenience in sampling saliva may also significantly reduce the risk of infection of medical staff.
Funding Statement: This work was supported by the China National Mega-Projects for Infectious Diseases (grant number 2017ZX10103008 and 2018ZX10101001); and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant numbers 81672014 and 81702079).
Declaration of Interests: All authors had no reported conflicts.
Ethics Approval Statement: This study conformed to the ethical guidelines of the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University.
Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Saliva; PCR
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation