RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 PREDICTIVE VALUE OF SMELL AND TASTE TEST VS PCR-RT SARS-COV-2 AND RAPID DIAGNOSTIC TESTS IN THE DIAGNOSIS OF INFECTION BY COVID-19. A PROSPECTIVE MULTI-CENTRIC STUDY
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.08.31.20185298
DO 10.1101/2020.08.31.20185298
A1 Rosalinda, Pieruzzini
A1 Carlos, Ayala-Grosso
A1 José de Jesús, Navas
A1 Carolina, Rodríguez Wilneg
A1 Nathalia, Parra
A1 Emily, Luque
A1 Aida, Sánchez Gago
A1 Scarleth, González
A1 Alexandra, Hagobian
A1 Angeline, Grullón
A1 Karen, Díaz
A1 Mariano, Morales
A1 Melanie, De Jesús
A1 Sonia, Peña
A1 Luis, Rodríguez
A1 Lenin, Peña Luis
A1 Ana, Asaro
A1 Magda, Magris
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/09/02/2020.08.31.20185298.abstract
AB There is a relationship between smell and taste disturbances and coronavirus infection. These symptoms have been considered the best predictor of coronavirus infection, for this reason, it was decided to evaluate the predictive value of the smell and taste test and its association with the results of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-RT and rapid diagnostic tests. in the diagnosis of pathology. Methodology: 248 patients divided into 3 groups: asymptomatic, symptomatic without chemosensory disorders, and chemosensory disorders alone. All of them underwent SARS-CoV-2 PCR-RT, a rapid diagnostic test and a test of Venezuelan smell and basic taste at the beginning. Weekly follow-up with smell and taste test and SARS-CoV-2 PCR-RT until recovery. Results: 20.56% of patients had smell and taste disorders to a variable degree and were positive by SARS-CoV-PCR-RT. 2.15.3% of patients with chemosensory disorders were negative for COVID-19. The positive predictive value of the smell and taste test was 57.3; Sensitivity 41.13% and specificity 69.35%. There were no statistically significant differences by age, sex and chemosensory disorders. The predominant chemosensory disorder was the combination of mild hyposmia and hypogeusia and appeared in the company of other symptoms. Recovery occurred in an average of 8.5 days, asynchronously with the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR negativization, which occurred up to more than 15 days after the senses recovered. Maximum time of negativization of the RT-PCR of 34 days. Conclusion: chemosensory disorders are a symptom and / or sign of coronavirus disease but cannot be considered as predictors of said disease in this population studied. The gold standard remains the SARS-CoV-2 PCR-RT test. Rapid diagnostic tests should be used for follow-up. Recommendations: it is necessary to expand the sample, include routine psychophysical smell and taste tests to screen cases and take race and virus mutations into consideration to explain behavior in certain populations.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementSelf-financed by the authors and the Ministry of People's Power for HealthAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Bioethics Commission of the Hospital Militar Universitario Dr. Carlos ArveloAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.Yesall data can be used https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.29.069054 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.25.20182063v1