TY - JOUR
T1 - SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis in saliva samples
T2 - Usefulness and limitations
AU - Gutiérrez-Gómez, María Lucía
AU - Ruíz, Zulema
AU - Gamboa, Fredy
AU - Roa, Nelly S.
AU - Cardozo, Claudia
AU - Ariza, Beatriz
AU - Aristizábal, Andrés
AU - Lugo, Andrés
AU - Bolívar, Stevenson
AU - Henao, Daniel
AU - García-Robayo, Dabeiba Adriana
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Author(s)
PY - 2024/7
Y1 - 2024/7
N2 - Saliva samples are important for diagnosis, because they are noninvasive and easy to acquire. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to investigate the value saliva samples have in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in comparison to nasal swabs and a new system named CovidCheck. A standard methodology identified the virus in 185 nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples revealing a sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of 82,100,100 and 94.67%, respectively for saliva samples. Viral presence in saliva samples with the standard methodology in comparison to the CovidCheck system was evaluated in 67 samples with sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of 68, 81, 68 and 81%, respectively. In conclusion, our results highlight the usefulness saliva samples have in detecting respiratory viral infections. However, presence of viral inhibitors and viral load in saliva, and the patient's clinical status should be considered as they might affect amplifying systems results.
AB - Saliva samples are important for diagnosis, because they are noninvasive and easy to acquire. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to investigate the value saliva samples have in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in comparison to nasal swabs and a new system named CovidCheck. A standard methodology identified the virus in 185 nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples revealing a sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of 82,100,100 and 94.67%, respectively for saliva samples. Viral presence in saliva samples with the standard methodology in comparison to the CovidCheck system was evaluated in 67 samples with sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of 68, 81, 68 and 81%, respectively. In conclusion, our results highlight the usefulness saliva samples have in detecting respiratory viral infections. However, presence of viral inhibitors and viral load in saliva, and the patient's clinical status should be considered as they might affect amplifying systems results.
KW - COVID-19
KW - Nasopharyngeal swabs
KW - Saliva
KW - qRT-PCR
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85191350614&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2024.116320
DO - 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2024.116320
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85191350614
SN - 0732-8893
VL - 109
JO - Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
JF - Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
IS - 3
M1 - 116320
ER -
