scholarly journals Declining SARS-CoV-2 PCR sensitivity with time and dependence on clinical features: consequences for control

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara J.M. Bergmans ◽  
Chantal B.E.M. Reusken ◽  
Anne J.G. Van Oudheusden ◽  
Gert-Jan Godeke ◽  
Axel A. Bonacic Marinovic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Severity ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Clinical Sensitivity ◽  
Health Measures ◽  
Supportive Role ◽  
Upper Respiratory ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Bayesian Statistical Modeling

Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on upper respiratory tract (URT) samples is the primary method to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infections and guide public health measures, with a supportive role for serology. However, the clinical sensitivity of RT-PCR remains uncertain. In the present study, Bayesian statistical modeling was used to retrospectively determine the sensitivity of RT-PCR using SARS-CoV-2 serology in 644 COVID-19-suspected patients with varying degrees of disease severity and duration. The sensitivity of RT-PCR ranged between 79-95%; while increasing with disease severity, it decreased rapidly over time in mild COVID-19 cases. Negative URT RT-PCR results should therefore be interpreted in the context of clinical characteristics, especially with regard to containment of viral transmission based on the 'test, trace and isolate' principle.

scholarly journals SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Fecal Sample from a Patient with Typical Findings of COVID-19 Pneumonia on CT but Negative to Multiple SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Tests on Oropharyngeal and Nasopharyngeal Swab Samples

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 290
Author(s):  
Barbara Brogna ◽  
Carlo Brogna ◽  
Mauro Petrillo ◽  
Adriana Modestina Conte ◽  
Giulio Benincasa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Respiratory Tract ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Negative Results ◽  
Upper Respiratory ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Pcr Test

Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) negative results in the upper respiratory tract represent a major concern for the clinical management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Herein, we report the case of a 43-years-old man with a strong clinical suspicion of COVID-19, who resulted in being negative to multiple severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RT-PCR tests performed on different oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swabs, despite serology having confirmed the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgM. The patient underwent a chest computed tomography (CT) that showed typical imaging findings of COVID-19 pneumonia. The presence of viral SARS-CoV-2 was confirmed only by performing a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test on stool. Performing of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test on fecal samples can be a rapid and useful approach to confirm COVID-19 diagnosis in cases where there is an apparent discrepancy between COVID-19 clinical symptoms coupled with chest CT and SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests’ results on samples from the upper respiratory tract.

scholarly journals Is it enough for COVID-19 screening test? Limitation of swab test and general characteristics of mild symptom patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 104 (2) ◽  
pp. 003685042110261
Author(s):  
Sungwoo Choi ◽  
Hyo Jeong Choi ◽  
Ho Jung Kim
Keyword(s):  
Screening Test ◽  
Community Treatment ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Pcr Assay ◽  
Positive Rate ◽  
Upper Respiratory ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Discharge Criteria

The most common method for SARS-CoV-2 testing is throat or nasal swabbing by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. In South Korea, drive-through swab test is used for screening system and community treatment centers (CTCs), which admit and treat confirmed COVID-19 patients with mild symptoms, are being used. This retrospective study was conducted on patients admitted to a CTC on March 6, 2020. A total of 313 patients were admitted. The nasal and throat swabs were collected from the upper respiratory tract, and a sputum test was performed to obtain lower respiratory samples. The positive rate of the first set of test, sputum test was higher than that of the swab test ( p = 0.011). In the second set of test, 1 week after the first ones, the rate of positive swab tests was relatively high ( p = 0.026). In the first set of test, 66 of 152 (43.4%) patients showed 24-h consecutive negative swab test results, when the sputum test results were considered together, that number fell to 29 patients (19.1%) ( p < 0.001). Also, in the second set of test, 63 of 164 (38.4%) patients met the discharge criteria only when the swab test was considered; that number fell to 30 (18.3%) when the sputum test results were also considered ( p < 0.001). Using the swab test alone is insufficient for screening test and discharge decision. Patients who may have positive result in the sputum test can be missed.

scholarly journals Anosmia as a Screening Tool for COVID-19 Infection: A Prospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Esra AlHamadani ◽  
Sania Zia ◽  
Ali AlRahma ◽  
Firas AlNajjar
Keyword(s):  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Index Finger ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
The Public ◽  
Single Center Study ◽  
Upper Respiratory ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Low Sensitivity

<b><i>Objectives:</i></b> Several studies promoted anosmia as a possible isolated symptom for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). No studies used feasible methods of smell testing that the public would use to address the accuracy of these claims. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> This is a single-center study conducted between April 2020 and June 2020. The sense of smell was tested in vitally stable suspected COVID-19 patients with no/mild upper respiratory tract infection symptoms prior to nasopharyngeal swabbing for reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Patients were instructed to close their eyes. Each nostril was tested separately while the other was blocked with the patient’s index finger. Patients inhaled from 2 concealed vials (coffee and strawberry essence) consecutively, kept within 30 cm of the nostril for 60 s. Patients who could not identify both odors with both nostrils were recorded as “anosmia.” <b><i>Results:</i></b> Out of 346 eligible subjects, 43 had anosmia of which 26 (60%) tested COVID-19 positive. χ<sup>2</sup> test showed a <i>p</i> value &#x3c;0.001. The test showed a sensitivity of 30% (95% confidence interval [CI] 21%, 41%) and specificity 94% (95% CI 90%, 96%). Logistic regression revealed an odds ratio of 5.9 (95% CI 3.0, 12) <i>p</i> value &#x3c;0.001. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Given the low sensitivity (30%) of this method in detecting COVID-19 infection, we conclude that this method is not a useful screening tool for COVID-19 infection. The moderate negative predictive value (80%) is nongeneralizable.

scholarly journals Real-Time Polymerase chain reaction trends in COVID-19 patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr Sana Abbas ◽  
Aisha Rafique ◽  
Dr Beenish Abbas ◽  
Dr Rashid Iqbal
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Polymerase Chain Reaction Test ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Objective: To assess trends of real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction test in Coronavirus infected Patients. Methods: This cross-sectional analytical study was conducted at Tertiary Care Institute, Rawalpindi from March 2020 to June 2020. All patients confirmed COVID positive by real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) with recent travel history, close contact with known diagnosed patients and had symptoms of fever or upper respiratory tract with body aches. Nasopharyngeal swabs were taken and results generated within 48 hours. Positive PCR was admission criteria follow up was carried out at 7th and 8th day, with negative PCR were discharged. However, those who had persistent positive PCR on the 8th day were tested again on 11th and 12th day. Those with persistent positive results beyond 12th day were shifted to specialized quarantine centres. Results: A total of three hundred and ninety-two patients with mild to moderate illness, PCR positive for COVID 19 were included study with age range 9 - 45 and mean 33.22±7.98 years. A total of 8 (2%) patients were females and 384(98%) males. The duration of the negative test result was Mean ± Std. Deviation 9.05±2.00 with 7 – 8 days 152(38.8%)in and 11 – 12 days in 160(40.8%). PCR results on Day 7 and 8 were negative in 144(36.7%) patients whereas positive in 248(63.3%). PCR results on Day 11 and 12 were negative in 312(79.6%) patients whereas positive in 80 (20.4%). Conclusion: To conclude Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction (rT-PCR) inclines to give false negative results additionally can stay positive in asymptomatic patients for moderately longer-term. Hence decision to discharge ought to be intricately adjusted between RT-PCR, clinical judgement, radiological examinations, and biochemical assays. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.1.3000 How to cite this:Abbas S, Rafique A, Abbas B, Iqbal R. Real-Time Polymerase chain reaction trends in COVID-19 patients. Pak J Med Sci. 2021;37(1):180-184. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.1.3000 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

scholarly journals The clinical sensitivity of a single SARS-CoV-2 upper respiratory tract RT-PCR test for diagnosing COVID-19 using convalescent antibody as a comparator

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. e209-e211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abigail Holborow ◽  
Hibo Asad ◽  
Lavinia Porter ◽  
Poppy Tidswell ◽  
Claire Johnston ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Respiratory Tract ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Clinical Sensitivity ◽  
Upper Respiratory ◽  
Pcr Test

scholarly journals The Effect of Sample Site, Illness Duration, and the Presence of Pneumonia on the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by Real-time Reverse Transcription PCR

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Sutjipto ◽  
Pei Hua Lee ◽  
Jun Yang Tay ◽  
Shehara M Mendis ◽  
Mohammad Yazid Abdad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Reverse Transcription ◽  
Sampling Site ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
Clinical Sensitivity ◽  
Illness Onset ◽  
Reverse Transcription Pcr ◽  
Upper Respiratory ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Respiratory Specimens

Abstract Background The performance of real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 varies with sampling site(s), illness stage, and infection site. Methods Unilateral nasopharyngeal, nasal midturbinate, throat swabs, and saliva were simultaneously sampled for SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR from suspected or confirmed cases of COVID-19. True positives were defined as patients with at least 1 SARS-CoV-2 detected by rRT-PCR from any site on the evaluation day or at any time point thereafter, until discharge. Diagnostic performance was assessed and extrapolated for site combinations. Results We evaluated 105 patients; 73 had active SARS-CoV-2 infection. Overall, nasopharyngeal specimens had the highest clinical sensitivity at 85%, followed by throat, 80%, midturbinate, 62%, and saliva, 38%–52%. Clinical sensitivity for nasopharyngeal, throat, midturbinate, and saliva was 95%, 88%, 72%, and 44%–56%, respectively, if taken ≤7 days from onset of illness, and 70%, 67%, 47%, 28%–44% if &gt;7 days of illness. Comparing patients with upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) vs pneumonia, clinical sensitivity for nasopharyngeal, throat, midturbinate, and saliva was 92% vs 70%, 88% vs 61%, 70% vs 44%, 43%–54% vs 26%–45%, respectively. A combination of nasopharyngeal plus throat or midturbinate plus throat specimen afforded overall clinical sensitivities of 89%–92%; this rose to 96% for persons with URTI and 98% for persons ≤7 days from illness onset. Conclusions Nasopharyngeal specimens, followed by throat specimens, offer the highest clinical sensitivity for COVID-19 diagnosis in early illness. Clinical sensitivity improves and is similar when either midturbinate or nasopharyngeal specimens are combined with throat specimens. Upper respiratory specimens perform poorly if taken after the first week of illness or if there is pneumonia.

scholarly journals Exploring the Clinical Utility of Gustatory Dysfunction (GD) as a Triage Symptom Prior to Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) in the Diagnosis of COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Life ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 1315
Author(s):  
Khang Wen Pang ◽  
Sher-Lyn Tham ◽  
Li Shia Ng
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Reverse Transcription ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Background: The diagnosis of COVID-19 is made using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) but its sensitivity varies from 20 to 100%. The presence of gustatory dysfunction (GD) in a patient with upper respiratory tract symptoms might increase the clinical suspicion of COVID-19. Aims: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR−) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of using GD as a triage symptom prior to RT-PCR. Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched up to 20 June 2021. Studies published in English were included if they compared the frequency of GD in COVID-19 adult patients (proven by RT-PCR) to COVID-19 negative controls in case control or cross-sectional studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Results: 21,272 COVID-19 patients and 52,298 COVID-19 negative patients were included across 44 studies from 21 countries. All studies were of moderate to high risk of bias. Patients with GD were more likely to test positive for COVID-19: DOR 6.39 (4.86–8.40), LR+ 3.84 (3.04–4.84), LR− 0.67 (0.64–0.70), pooled sensitivity 0.37 (0.29–0.47) and pooled specificity 0.92 (0.89–0.94). While history/questionnaire-based assessments were predictive of RT-PCR positivity (DOR 6.62 (4.95–8.85)), gustatory testing was not (DOR 3.53 (0.98–12.7)). There was significant heterogeneity among the 44 studies (I2 = 92%, p < 0.01). Conclusions: GD is useful as a symptom to determine if a patient should undergo further testing, especially in resource-poor regions where COVID-19 testing is scarce. Patients with GD may be advised to quarantine while repeated testing is performed if the initial RT-PCR is negative. Funding: None.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document