Saliva has been recommended as an alternative sample for detection of SARS CoV-2 infection, but data are limited.
•
In this study, SARS CoV-2 was detected by RT-PCR in 35 of 124 patients, 30 (85.7 %) by saliva and 33 (94.3 %) by NP swab.
•
The median cycle threshold value was significantly lower for NPS than for saliva.
•
A third of pure saliva samples were difficult to pipet, which slowed processing.
Abstract
Background
A major expansion in SARS CoV-2 testing is urgently needed. Saliva is an attractive option as an alternative for nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), since saliva can be self-collected, is non-invasive, and sample quality is not dependent on the expertise of the collector.
Objective
To compare SARS CoV-2 positivity on paired NPS and saliva samples.
Study design
NPS and paired saliva samples were prospectively collected from symptomatic outpatients suspected of having COVID-19 and were tested by real-time RT-PCR.
Results
In total, 35/124 (26.6 %) samples were RT-PCR positive, with 33/35 positive by NPS (sensitivity = 94.3 % (95 % CI 81.4%–99.0%)) and 30/35 by pure saliva (sensitivity = 85.7 % (95 % CI 70.6%–93.7%)), for an overall agreement of 117/124 (94.4 %). The median cycle threshold value was significantly lower for NPS than for saliva (p = 0.0331). A third or more of pure saliva samples from symptomatic patients were thick, stringy, and difficult to pipet.
Conclusions
Real-time RT-PCR of pure saliva had an overall sensitivity for SARS CoV-2 RNA detection of 85.7 % when compared to simultaneously collected NPS. Our study highlighted the need to optimize collection and processing before saliva can be used for high volume testing.