TY - JOUR
T1 - The role of mouthwash sampling in SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis
AU - Biber, Asaf
AU - Lev, Dana
AU - Mandelboim, Michal
AU - Lustig, Yaniv
AU - Harmelin, Geva
AU - Shaham, Amit
AU - Erster, Oran
AU - Schwartz, Eli
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2021/10
Y1 - 2021/10
N2 - Background: The current practice of COVID-19 diagnosis worldwide is the use of oro-nasopharyngeal (ONP) swabs. Our study aim was to explore mouthwash (MW) as an alternative diagnostic method, in light of the disadvantages of ONP swabs. Methods: COVID-19 outpatients molecular-confirmed by ONP swab were repeatedly examined with ONP swab and MW with normal saline (0.9%). Other types of fluids were compared to normal saline. The Cq values obtained with each method were compared. Results: Among 137 pairs of ONP swabs and MW samples, 84.6% (116/137) of ONP swabs were positive by at least one of the genes (N, E, R). However MW detected 70.8% (97/137) of samples as positive, which means 83.6% (97/116) out of positive ONP swabs, missing mainly Cq value > 30. In both methods, the N gene was the most sensitive one. Therefore, MW samples targeting N gene, which was positive in 95/137 (69.3%), are comparable to ONP swabs targeting E and R genes which gave equal results—95/137 (69.3%) and 90/137 (65.7%), respectively. Comparing saline MW to distilled water gave equal results, while commercial mouth-rinsing solutions were less sensitive. Conclusions: MW with normal saline, especially when tested by N gene, can effectively detect COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, this method was not inferior when compared to R and E genes of ONP swabs, which are common targets in many laboratories around the world.
AB - Background: The current practice of COVID-19 diagnosis worldwide is the use of oro-nasopharyngeal (ONP) swabs. Our study aim was to explore mouthwash (MW) as an alternative diagnostic method, in light of the disadvantages of ONP swabs. Methods: COVID-19 outpatients molecular-confirmed by ONP swab were repeatedly examined with ONP swab and MW with normal saline (0.9%). Other types of fluids were compared to normal saline. The Cq values obtained with each method were compared. Results: Among 137 pairs of ONP swabs and MW samples, 84.6% (116/137) of ONP swabs were positive by at least one of the genes (N, E, R). However MW detected 70.8% (97/137) of samples as positive, which means 83.6% (97/116) out of positive ONP swabs, missing mainly Cq value > 30. In both methods, the N gene was the most sensitive one. Therefore, MW samples targeting N gene, which was positive in 95/137 (69.3%), are comparable to ONP swabs targeting E and R genes which gave equal results—95/137 (69.3%) and 90/137 (65.7%), respectively. Comparing saline MW to distilled water gave equal results, while commercial mouth-rinsing solutions were less sensitive. Conclusions: MW with normal saline, especially when tested by N gene, can effectively detect COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, this method was not inferior when compared to R and E genes of ONP swabs, which are common targets in many laboratories around the world.
KW - COVID-19
KW - Gargling
KW - Mouth rinse
KW - Saliva
KW - Throat-wash
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85111861367&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10096-021-04320-4
DO - 10.1007/s10096-021-04320-4
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 34342767
AN - SCOPUS:85111861367
SN - 0934-9723
VL - 40
SP - 2199
EP - 2206
JO - European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases
JF - European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases
IS - 10
ER -