Home⇛The PCMC Journal⇛vol. 18 no. 1 (2022)

Diagnostic accuracy of Saliva Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) compared to Nasopharyngeal Swab Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) in the detection of SARS-COV-2 in pediatric patients ages 0-18 years old: A met

Jazztine V Del Rosario | Maria Eva I Jopson

Discipline: medicine by specialism

 

Abstract:

OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of Saliva RT-PCR in the detection of SARS-COV-2 in pediatric patients ages 0-18 years old, compared to the nasopharyngeal RTPCR swab. METHODOLOGY: A metanalysis was done to synthesize the diagnostic accuracy of saliva RT-PCR compared to the nasopharyngeal RT-PCR in the detection of SARS-COV 2 in pediatric patients ages 0-18 years old. Five studies published from January to September 2021 were analyzed using the "midas" command of STATA14. MIDAS command is a comprehensive program of statistical and graphical routines for undertaking meta-analysis of diagnostic test performance in Stata. The index and reference tests (gold standard) are dichotomous. Primary data synthesis is performed within the bivariate mixed-effects regression framework focused on making inferences about average sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: The World Health Organization’s acceptable sensitivity and specificity for products used in COVID-19 diagnostics is ≥ 80% and ≥ 97% respectively. The results of this metanalysis showed the pooled sensitivity of Saliva RT-PCR as compared to the Nasopharyngeal RT-PCR is at 87% (81-92% at 95% CI) and the pooled specificity is at 97% (95% CI: 96-98%). CONCLUSIONS: This metanalysis demonstrates that saliva can be used as an alternative specimen for SARS-COV-2 diagnostic testing in children. Aside from the acceptable pooled specificity and sensitivity, the use of saliva offers several advantages. However, the authors recommend to include more studies for future metanalysis research, to further increase samplesize, and to include both symptomatic and asymptomatic pediatric age group participants. A future prospective research study comparing the two diagnostic modalities is likewise recommended



References:

  1. World Health Organization. (n.d.). Who Western Pacific. World Health Organization. Retrieved May 27, 2021, from https://www.who.int/westernpacific/emergencies/covid-19.
  2. Novel corona virus update 29 January 2020 background. (n.d.). Retrieved May 27, 2021, from https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/maldives/novel-corona-virus-update-mav-30jan.pdf?sfvrsn=a10dfb7b_2
  3. Tang Y. W, Schmitz JE, Persing DH, Stratton CW. Laboratory diagnosis of COVID‐19: current issues and challenges. J Clin Microbiol.2020;58(6):e00512-20.
  4. Chen JH, Yip CC, Poon RW, Chan KH, Cheng VC, Hung IF, Chan JF, Yuen KY, To KK. Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point-of-care assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.  Emerging microbes & infections. 2020 Jan 1;9(1):1356-9.
  5. Migueres M, Mengelle C, Dimeglio C, Didier A, Alvarez M, Delobel P, Mansuy JM, Izopet J. Saliva sampling for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infections in symptomatic patients and asymptomatic carriers. Journal of Clinical Virology. 2020 Sep 1;130:104580.
  6. Williams E, Bond K, Zhang B, Putland M, Williamson DA. Saliva as a noninvasive specimen for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Journal of clinical microbiology. 2020 Jul 23;58(8):e00776- 20.
  7. Rao M, Rashid FA, Sabri FS, Jamil NN, Zain R, Hashim R, Amran F, Kok HT, Samad MA, Ahmad N. Comparing nasopharyngeal swab and early morning saliva for the identification of SARS-CoV-2 [published online ahead of print, 2020 Aug 6]. Clin Infect Dis. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa1156. 2020.
  8. Wyllie AL, Fournier J, Casanovas-Massana A, Campbell M, Tokuyama M, Vijayakumar P, Warren JL, Geng B, Muenker MC, Moore AJ, Vogels CB. Saliva or nasopharyngeal swab specimens for detection of SARS-CoV-2. New England Journal of Medicine. 2020 Sep 24;383(13):1283-6.
  9. Hanson KE, Altayar O, Caliendo AM, Arias CA, Englund JA, Hayden MK, Lee MJ, Loeb M, Patel R, El Alayli A, Sultan S. The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Antigen Testing. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2021 Jun 23.
  10. Ranney ML, Griffeth V, Jha AK. Critical supply shortages—the need forv ventilators and personal protective equipment during the Covid-19 pandemic. New England Journal of Medicine. 2020 Apr 30;382(18):e41.
  11. Sueki A, Matsuda K, Yamaguchi A, Uehara M, Sugano M, Uehara T, Honda T. Evaluation of saliva as diagnostic materials for influenza virus infection by PCR-based assays. Clinica Chimica Acta. 2016 Jan 30;453:71-4.
  12. To KK, Yip CC, Lai CY, Wong CK, Ho DT, Pang PK, Ng AC, Leung KH, Poon RW, Chan KH, Cheng VC. Saliva as a diagnostic specimen for testing respiratory virus by a point-of-care molecular assay: a diagnostic validity study. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2019 Mar 1;25(3):372-8.
  13. Kim YG, Yun SG, Kim MY, Park K, Cho CH, Yoon SY, Nam MH, Lee CK, Cho YJ, Lim CS. Comparison between saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens for detection of respiratory viruses by multiplex reverse transcription-PCR. Journal of clinical  icrobiology. 2017 Jan;55(1):226-33.
  14. Azzi L, Carcano G, Gianfagna F, Grossi P, Dalla Gasperina D, Genoni A, Fasano The PCMC Journal, COVID-19 Special EditionVolume 18, No.1 17 M, Sessa F, Tettamanti L, Carinci F, Maurino V. Saliva is a reliable tool to detect SARS-CoV-2. Journal of Infection. 2020 Jul 1;81(1):e45-50.
  15. Pasomsub E, Watcharananan SP, Boonyawat K, Janchompoo P, Wongtabtim G,  Suksuwan W, Sungkanuparph S, Phuphuakrat A. Saliva sample as a non-invasive specimen for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019: a cross-sectional study. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2021 Feb 1;27(2):285-e1.
  16. Williams E, Bond K, Zhang B, Putland M, Williamson DA. Saliva as a noninvasive specimen for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Journal of clinical microbiology. 2020 Jul 23;58(8):e00776-20.
  17. Uwamino Y, Nagata M, Aoki W, Fujimori Y, Nakagawa T, Yokota H, Sakai-Tagawa Y, Iwatsuki-Horimoto K, Shiraki T, Uchida S, Uno S. Accuracy and stability of saliva as a sample for reverse transcription PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2. Journal of clinical pathology. 2021 Jan 1;74(1):67-8.
  18. Yee R, Truong TT, Pannaraj PS, Eubanks N, Gai E, Jumarang J, Turner L, Peralta A, Lee Y, Dien Bard J. Saliva is a promising alternative specimen for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in children and adults. Journal of clinical microbiology. 2021 Jan 21;59(2):e02686-20.
  19. Buban JM, Villanueva PN, Gregorio GE. Should RT-PCR of saliva samples be used for diagnosis of COVID.
  20. Al Suwaidi H, Senok A, Varghese R, Deesi Z, Khansaheb H, Pokasirakath S, Chacko B, Abufara I, Loney T, Alsheikh- Ali A. Saliva for molecular detection of  SARS-CoV-2 in school-age children. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2021 Sep 1;27(9):1330-5.
  21. Alenquer M, Silva TM, Akpogheneta O, Ferreira F, Vale-Costa S, Medina-Lopes M, Batista F, Garcia AM, Barreto VM, Paulino C, Costa J. Saliva molecular testing bypassing RNA extraction is suitable for monitoring and diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection in children. medRxiv. 2021 Jan 1.
  22. Felix AC, De Paula AV, Ribeiro AC, Inemami M, Costa AA, Leal CO, Figueiredo WM, Sarmento DJ, Sassaki TA, Pannuti CS, Braz-Silva PH. Saliva as a reliable sample for COVID-19 diagnosis in pediatric patients. medRxiv. 2021 Jan 1.
  23. Huber M, Schreiber PW, Scheier T, Audigé A, Buonomano R, Rudiger A, Braun DL, Eich G, Keller DI, Hasse B, Böni J. High efficacy of saliva in detecting SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR in adults and children. Microorganisms. 2021 Mar;9(3):642.
  24. Ana Laura GO, Abraham Josue NR, Briceida LM, Israel PO, Tania AF, Nancy MR, Lourdes JB, Daniela DL, Fernando OR, Carlos Mauricio JE, Sergio Rene BP. Sensitivity of the molecular test in saliva for detection of COVID-19 in pediatric patients with concurrent conditions. Frontiers in Pediatrics. 2021 Apr 12;9:293.
  25. Okoturo E, Amure M. SARS-CoV-2 saliva testing using reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR): A Systematic Review. International Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2022 May 13.
  26. El-Sharkawy F, Tang CN, Fitzgerald AS, Khatib LA, Graham-Wooten J, Glaser L, Collman RG, Van Deerlin VM, Herlihy SE. Saliva versus Upper Respiratory Swabs: Equivalent for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 University Screening while Saliva Positivity Is Prolonged After Symptom Onset in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalized Patients. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics.
  27. Mestdagh P, Gillard M, Dhillon SK, Pirnay JP, Poels J, Hellemans J, Hutse V, Vermeiren C, Boutier M, De Wever V, Soentjens P. Evaluating Diagnostic Accuracy of Saliva Sampling Methods for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Reveals Differential Sensitivity and Association with Viral Load. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics. 2021 Oct 1;23(10):1249-58.

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic