Rapid and accurate SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing is essential for controlling the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The current gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis is real-time RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 from nasopharyngeal swabs. Low sensitivity, exposure risks to healthcare workers, and global shortages of swabs and personal protective equipment, however, necessitate the validation of new diagnostic approaches. Saliva is a promising candidate for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics because (1) collection is minimally invasive and can reliably be self-administered and (2) saliva has exhibited comparable sensitivity to nasopharyngeal swabs in detection of other respiratory pathogens, including endemic human coronaviruses, in previous studies. To validate the use of saliva for SARS-CoV-2 detection, we tested nasopharyngeal and saliva samples from confirmed COVID-19 patients and self-collected samples from healthcare workers on COVID-19 wards. When we compared SARS-CoV-2 detection from patient-matched nasopharyngeal and saliva samples, we found that saliva yielded greater detection sensitivity and consistency throughout the course of infection. Furthermore, we report less variability in self-sample collection of saliva. Taken together, our findings demonstrate that saliva is a viable and more sensitive alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs and could enable at-home self-administered sample collection for accurate large-scale SARS-CoV-2 testing.
Background: The outbreak of novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP) caused by 2019-nCoV spread rapidly, and elucidation the diagnostic accuracy of different respiratory specimens is crucial for the control and treatment of this diseases. Methods: Respiratory samples including nasal swabs, throat swabs, sputum and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) were collected from Guangdong CDC confirmed NCP patients, and viral RNAs were detected using a CFDA approved detection kit. Results were analyzed in combination with sample collection date and clinical information. Finding: Except for BALF, the sputum possessed the highest positive rate (74.4%~88.9%), followed by nasal swabs (53.6%~73.3%) for both severe and mild cases during the first 14 days after illness onset (d.a.o). For samples collected ≥ 15 d.a.o, sputum and nasal swabs still possessed a high positive rate ranging from 42.9%~61.1%. The positive rate of throat swabs collected ≥ 8 d.a.o was low, especially in samples from mild cases. Viral RNAs could be detected in all the lower respiratory tract of severe cases, but not the mild cases. CT scan of cases 02, 07 and 13 showed typical viral pneumonia with ground glass opacity, while no viral RNAs were detected in first three or all the upper respiratory samples. Interpretation: Sputum is most accurate for laboratory diagnosis of NCP, followed by nasal swabs. Detection of viral RNAs in BLAF is necessary for diagnosis and monitoring of viruses in severe cases. CT scan could serve as an important make up for the diagnosis of NCP. Funding National Science and Technology Major Project, Sanming Project of Medicine and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation.
This narrative review focuses on thoracic ultrasonography (lung and pleural) with the aim of outlining its utility for the critical care clinician. The article summarizes the applications of thoracic ultrasonography for the evaluation and management of pneumothorax, pleural effusion, acute dyspnea, pulmonary edema, pulmonary embolism, pneumonia, interstitial processes, and the patient on mechanical ventilatory support. Mastery of lung and pleural ultrasonography allows the intensivist to rapidly diagnose and guide the management of a wide variety of disease processes that are common features of critical illness. Its ease of use, rapidity, repeatability, and reliability make thoracic ultrasonography the "go to" modality for imaging the lung and pleura in an efficient, cost effective, and safe manner, such that it can largely replace chest imaging in critical care practice. It is best used in conjunction with other components of critical care ultrasonography to yield a comprehensive evaluation of the critically ill patient at point of care.
Keywords: Critical care ultrasonography; Lung ultrasonography; Pleural ultrasonography; Ultrasonography.
Rapid and accurate SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing is essential for controlling the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The current gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis is real-time RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 from nasopharyngeal swabs. Low sensitivity, exposure risks to healthcare workers, and global shortages of swabs and personal protective equipment, however, necessitate the validation of new diagnostic approaches. Saliva is a promising candidate for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics because (1) collection is minimally invasive and can reliably be self-administered and (2) saliva has exhibited comparable sensitivity to nasopharyngeal swabs in detection of other respiratory pathogens, including endemic human coronaviruses, in previous studies. To validate the use of saliva for SARS-CoV-2 detection, we tested nasopharyngeal and saliva samples from confirmed COVID-19 patients and self-collected samples from healthcare workers on COVID-19 wards. When we compared SARS-CoV-2 detection from patient-matched nasopharyngeal and saliva samples, we found that saliva yielded greater detection sensitivity and consistency throughout the course of infection. Furthermore, we report less variability in self-sample collection of saliva. Taken together, our findings demonstrate that saliva is a viable and more sensitive alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs and could enable at-home self-administered sample collection for accurate large-scale SARS-CoV-2 testing.