Analysis of sputum/tracheal aspirate and nasopharyngeal samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection by laboratory-developed test and Panther Fusion system

Thwe, Phyu M.; Ren, Ping

doi:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2020.115228

Cited by 11 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Concerning COVID-19, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the collection of samples from the upper respiratory tract through nasopharyngeal swabs or from the lower respiratory tract employing endotracheal sputum aspiration [33] . Coronavirus mRNA can be detected by the amplification of specific sequences through the transcriptase reverse-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) method, considered the gold standard for molecular diagnosis [34] .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Updating the use of nano-biosensors as promising devices for the diagnosis of coronavirus family members: A systematic review

Aquino

Paschoalin

Tessaro

et al. 2022

Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coronavidae viruses, such as SARS-CoV, SARS-CoV-2, and MERS-CoV, cause severe lower respiratory tract infection, acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea and fever, eventually leading to death. Fast, accurate, reproductible, and cost-effective SARS-CoV-2 identification can be achieved employing nano-biosensors, reinforcing conventional methodologies to avoid the spread of COVID-19 within and across communities. Nano-biosensors built using gold, silver, graphene, In 2 O 3 nanowire and iron oxide nanoparticles, Quantum Dots and carbon nanofibers have been successfully employed to detect specific virus antigens – nucleic acid sequences and/or proteins –or host antibodies produced in response to viral infection. Biorecognition counterpart molecules have been immobilized on the surface of these nanomaterials, leading to selective virus detection by optical or electrochemical transducer systems. This systematic review assessed studies on described and tested immunonsensors and genosensors designed from distinct nanomaterials available at the Pubmed, Scopus, and Science Direct databases. Twenty-three nano biosensors were found suitable for unequivocal coronavirus detection in clinical samples. Nano-biosensors coupled to RT-LAMP/RT-PCR assays can optimize RNA extraction, reduce analysis times and/or eliminate sophisticated instrumentation. Although promising for the diagnosis of Coronavidae family members, further trials in large populations must be adequately and rigorously conducted to address nano-biosensor applicability in the clinical practice for early coronavirus infection detection.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Updating the use of nano-biosensors as promising devices for the diagnosis of coronavirus family members: A systematic review

Aquino

Paschoalin

Tessaro

et al. 2022

Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the few published case series with this framework, test concordance and accuracy were quite high. 13,25 The optimal testing strategy for hospitalized patients with tracheostomies due to COVID-19 remains unclear. To de-escalate special pathogens precautions in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and tracheostomies, our institution requires either: 1) two negative NP swabs collected more than 24 hours apart plus one negative TR specimen; or 2) two negative TR specimens collected more than 24 hours apart plus one negative NP swab.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Clinicians have also seen variable SARS-CoV-2 shedding depending on anatomic site and time point of sampling. 12,13 Patients with tracheostomies placed during their COVID-19 disease course have an anatomically altered connection between their upper and lower airways that could theoretically impact the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Multiple case reports have shown discordant detection of SARS-CoV-2 in the nasopharynx versus trachea for patients with a history of laryngectomy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discordant SARS‐CoV‐2 Detection in the Nasopharynx Versus Trachea for Patients With Tracheostomies

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives/Hypothesis Patients with tracheostomies have an anatomically altered connection between their upper and lower airways that could impact SARS‐CoV‐2 testing. Our goal was to evaluate for discordance in SARS‐CoV‐2 detection in hospitalized patients with COVID‐19 and tracheostomies based on the site analyzed. Study Design Retrospective chart review Methods This single‐institution study evaluated hospitalized patients with COVID‐19 who had tracheostomies placed during their treatment. We analyzed SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) results after tracheostomy. All included patients had nasopharyngeal (NP) and tracheal (TR) samples taken within a 48‐hour period, allowing us to characterize rate of test concordance. Results Forty‐five patients met our inclusion criteria. Thirty‐two (71.1%) patients had entirely concordant results after tracheostomy. However, 13 (28.9%) patients had at least one set of discordant results, the majority of which were NP negative and TR positive. There were no statistically significant differences in demographic or clinical variables, including time to tracheostomy and time to testing, among patients with concordant versus discordant SARS‐CoV‐2 results. Conclusion This represents the first study to examine SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA NAAT concordance between NP and TR sites in hospitalized patients with COVID‐19 and tracheostomies. One‐third of patients demonstrated discordant testing when NP and TR specimens were collected within a 48‐hour time period. Thus, patients with tracheostomies may have a higher false‐negative rate if only one site is assessed for SARS‐CoV‐2. We recommend analyzing samples from both the nasopharynx and trachea for these patients until more prospective data exist. Level of Evidence IV Laryngoscope , 2021

show abstract

“…The swab samples from the upper respiratory tract are predominantly advised but samples from the lower respiratory tract are also recommended by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a national public health institute in the United States, particularly for patients suffering from coughing symptoms. Samples from the lower respiratory tract are not compulsory to be collect either from BAL fluid, aspirates from the tracheal region, or sputum ( Thwe and Ren 2020 ). Sample collection from both of the BAL fluid and aspirates from the tracheal region have a greater risk of aerosol droplet generation and rapid spread to the sample collection environment ( Sanyaolu et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Diagnostic Technologies For Sars-cov-2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological characteristics and biomarkers of novel SARS-CoV-2 facilitated rapid development and implementation of diagnostic tools and surveillance measures

Ghodake

Shinde

Kadam

et al. 2021

Biosensors and Bioelectronics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analysis of sputum/tracheal aspirate and nasopharyngeal samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection by laboratory-developed test and Panther Fusion system

Cited by 11 publications

References 7 publications

Updating the use of nano-biosensors as promising devices for the diagnosis of coronavirus family members: A systematic review

Updating the use of nano-biosensors as promising devices for the diagnosis of coronavirus family members: A systematic review

Discordant SARS‐CoV‐2 Detection in the Nasopharynx Versus Trachea for Patients With Tracheostomies

Biological characteristics and biomarkers of novel SARS-CoV-2 facilitated rapid development and implementation of diagnostic tools and surveillance measures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About