Abstract
COVID-19 is diagnosed by detecting SARS-CoV-2 by nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) using real-time quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). Emerging evidences have shown the utility of saliva, although conflicting results have been reported regarding viral loads between NPS and saliva. We conducted a study to compare the viral loads in 42 patients with COVID-19. Both NPS and saliva specimens were simultaneously obtained at a median of 6 days (range, 1-12) after symptom onset. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 34 (81%) using NPS (median Ct value [IQR]=27.4 [21.3, 35.6]) and 38 (90%) using saliva (median Ct value [IQR]= 28.9 [23.1, 33.6]). There was no significance difference between them (Wilcoxon signed rank test: P=0.79) and Kendall’s W was 0.82, showing a high degree of agreement, indicating equivalent viral loads in NPS and saliva. After symptom onset, the Ct values of both NPS and saliva continued to increase over time, with no substantial difference. Self-collected saliva has a detection sensitivity comparable to that of NPS and is a useful diagnostic tool with mitigating uncomfortable process and the risk of aerosol transmission to healthcare workers.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Yes described in the text
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:
This study was approved by IRB
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.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
N/A
