4.7 Review

Detection profile of SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR in different types of clinical specimens: A systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY
卷 93, 期 2, 页码 719-725

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.26349

关键词

clinical sample; clinical specimen; COVID-19; polymerase chain reaction; SARS-CoV-2

类别

资金

  1. Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), Sweden

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Testing using appropriate specimens and accurate diagnostic tests like qRT-PCR is important for curbing the spread of COVID-19. A systematic review found high detection rates in lower respiratory tract specimens, while no virus was detected in urinogenital specimens. Bronchoalveolar lavage had the highest positive rate followed by rectal swabs and sputum. Nasopharyngeal swabs, commonly used, had a moderate positive rate. Low rates were observed in oropharyngeal swabs and blood samples, while no virus was found in urine samples. Fecal samples showed a positive rate, suggesting potential fecal transmission of SARS-CoV-2.
Testing is one of the commendable measures for curbing the spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). But, it should be done using the most appropriate specimen and an accurate diagnostic test such as real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). Therefore, a systematic review was conducted to determine the positive detection rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in different clinical specimens using qRT-PCR. A total of 8136 pooled clinical specimens were analyzed to detect SARS-CoV-2, the majority were nasopharyngeal swabs (69.6%). A lower respiratory tract (LRT) specimens had a positive rate (PR) of 71.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 60.3%-82.3%) while no virus was detected in the urinogenital specimens. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BLF) specimen had the PR of 91.8% (95% CI: 79.9%-103.7%), followed by rectal swabs; 87.8% (95% CI: 78.6%-96.9%) then sputum; 68.1% (95% CI: 56.9%-79.4%). A low PR was observed in oropharyngeal swabs; 7.6% (95% CI: 5.7%-9.6%) and blood samples; 1.0% (95% CI: -0.1%-2.1%) whereas no SARS-CoV-2 was detected in urine samples. Feces had a PR of 32.8% (95% CI:1 5.8%-49.8%). Nasopharyngeal swab, a widely used specimen had a PR of 45.5% (95% CI: 31.2%-59.7%). In this study, SARS-CoV-2 was highly detected in LRT specimens while no virus was detected in urinogenital specimens. BLF had the highest PR followed by rectal swab then sputum. Nasopharyngeal swab which is widely used had moderate PR. Low PR was recorded in oropharyngeal swab and blood samples while no virus was found in urine samples. Last, the virus was detected in feces, suggesting SARS-CoV-2 transmission by the fecal route.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据