Exploring alternative swabs for use in SARS-CoV-2 detection from the oropharynx and anterior nares.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a worldwide shortage of nasopharyngeal swabs and universal transport media. This study evaluated a combined oropharynx/nares (OP/Na) sample collection using two readily-available non-flocked swabs, transported in phosphate-buffered saline, and demonstrates equivalent performance in SARS-CoV-2 detection compared to a previously-validated OP/Na collection kit.

Patriquin G ，Davis I ，Heinstein C ，MacDonald J ，Hatchette TF ，LeBlanc JJ ... -  《-》

A combined oropharyngeal/nares swab is a suitable alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Given the global shortage of nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs typically used for respiratory virus detection, alternative collection methods were evaluated during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study showed that a combined oropharyngeal/nares swab is a suitable alternative to NP swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, with sensitivities of 91.7% and 94.4%, respectively.

LeBlanc JJ ，Heinstein C ，MacDonald J ，Pettipas J ，Hatchette TF ，Patriquin G ... -  《-》

Value of swab types and collection time on SARS-COV-2 detection using RT-PCR assay.

Liu M ，Li Q ，Zhou J ，Ai W ，Zheng X ，Zeng J ，Liu Y ，Xiang X ，Guo R ，Li X ，Wu X ，Xu H ，Jiang L ，Zhang H ，Chen J ，Tian L ，Luo J ，Luo C ... -  《-》

Nasal Swab as Preferred Clinical Specimen for COVID-19 Testing in Children.

Palmas G ，Moriondo M ，Trapani S ，Ricci S ，Calistri E ，Pisano L ，Perferi G ，Galli L ，Venturini E ，Indolfi G ，Azzari C ... -  《-》

Performance of Abbott ID Now COVID-19 Rapid Nucleic Acid Amplification Test Using Nasopharyngeal Swabs Transported in Viral Transport Media and Dry Nasal Swabs in a New York City Academic Institution.

The recent emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has posed formidable challenges for clinical laboratories seeking reliable laboratory diagnostic confirmation. The swift advance of the crisis in the United States has led to Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) facilitating the availability of molecular diagnostic assays without the more rigorous examination to which tests are normally subjected prior to FDA approval. Our laboratory currently uses two real-time reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) platforms, the Roche Cobas SARS-CoV2 and the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2. The two platforms demonstrate comparable performances; however, the run times for each assay are 3.5 h and 45 min, respectively. In search for a platform with a shorter turnaround time, we sought to evaluate the recently released Abbott ID Now COVID-19 assay, which is capable of producing positive results in as little as 5 min. We present here the results of comparisons between Abbott ID Now COVID-19 and Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 using nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral transport media and comparisons between Abbott ID Now COVID-19 and Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 using nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral transport media for Cepheid and dry nasal swabs for Abbott ID Now. Regardless of method of collection and sample type, Abbott ID Now COVID-19 had negative results in a third of the samples that tested positive by Cepheid Xpert Xpress when using nasopharyngeal swabs in viral transport media and 45% when using dry nasal swabs.

Basu A ，Zinger T ，Inglima K ，Woo KM ，Atie O ，Yurasits L ，See B ，Aguero-Rosenfeld ME ... -  《-》