Abstract
Adequate swab specimen collection, release and detection of nucleic acids by molecular diagnostic assays is largely attributed to the physical and chemical characteristics of different swab types. We investigated properties of three types of commercial nasopharyngeal swabs (nylon flocked: Type 1-Media Merge; Type 2-Kang Jian Medical Apparatus, China and Type 3-Wuxi NEST Biotechnology Co. Ltd, China) used in clinical diagnostics with the aim to establish if different swab designs and configurations had any effect on swab performance. Properties investigated included viral absorption, release, capture, extraction and recovery efficiency from each swab for the detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). All swab types (n=18) were inoculated with different amounts of SARS-CoV-2 live viral cultures (1:10, 1:100 and 1:1000 copies/ml) and eluted in sterile phosphate buffer saline. RNA was extracted from all swab eluates using a fully automated system (BD MAX™ System) and cycle threshold (Ct) values were compared. RNA stability was also investigated after dry storage of swabs at room temperature for 72 hours. Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) were observed in the absorption and release capabilities between Type 1 and 3 as well as between Type 2 and 3 swabs, however, no significant difference was observed between Type 1 and 2. Ct values and extraction efficiency amounts of SARS-CoV-2 varied amongst the swab types. We conclude that in order to facilitate accurate SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, assessment of NP swab characteristics is of importance before implementation for specimen collection in the clinical setting.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Funding received from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Grant number: OPP1171455
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
N/A- research was laboratory based did not include any human participants.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data is available
