tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
J Infect Chemother
. 2022 Sep 8;S1341-321X(22)00254-9.
doi: 10.1016/j.jiac.2022.09.001. Online ahead of print.
Potential usage of anterior nasal sampling in clinical practice with three rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2
Hidetoshi Nomoto[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Kei Yamamoto[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Erina Isaka[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Yusuke Miyazato[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Tetsuya Suzuki[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Taketomo Maruki[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Gen Yamada[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Kohei Kamegai[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Yutaro Akiyama[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Satoshi Ide[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Masami Kurokawa[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Ataru Moriya[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Kazuhisa Mezaki[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Shintaro Yagi[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Hisashi Nojima[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Kentaro Yamakawa[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Norio Ohmagari[SUP] 1 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
Introduction: Anterior nasal sampling (AN) might be more convenient for patients than NP sampling to diagnose coronavirus disease. This study investigated the feasibility of rapid antigen tests for AN sampling, and the factors affecting the test accuracy.
Methods: This single-center prospective study evaluated one qualitative (ESP) and two quantitative (LUMI and LUMI-P) rapid antigen tests using AN and NP swabs. Symptomatic patients aged 20 years or older, who were considered eligible for reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction using NP samples within 9 days of onset were recruited. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative concordance rates between AN and NP samples were assessed for the rapid antigen tests. We investigated the characteristics that affected the concordance between AN and NP sampling results.
Results: A total of 128 cases were recruited, including 28 positive samples and 100 negative samples. The sensitivity and specificity of AN samples using ESP were 0.81 and 1.00, while those of NP samples were 0.94 and 1.00. The sensitivity of AN and NP samples was 0.91 and 0.97, respectively, and specificity was 1.00, for both LUMI and LUMI-P. The positive concordance rates of AN to NP sampling were 0.87, 0.94, and 0.85 for ESP, LUMI, and LUMI-P, respectively. No factor had a significant effect on the concordance between the sampling methods.
Conclusions: ESP, LUMI, and LUMI-P showed practical diagnostic accuracy for AN sampling compared to NP sampling. There was no significant factor affecting the concordance between AN and NP sampling for these rapid antigen tests.
Keywords: COVID-19; Espline; Lumipulse; SARS-CoV-2; anterior nasal; rapid antigen test.
. 2022 Sep 8;S1341-321X(22)00254-9.
doi: 10.1016/j.jiac.2022.09.001. Online ahead of print.
Potential usage of anterior nasal sampling in clinical practice with three rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2
Hidetoshi Nomoto[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Kei Yamamoto[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Erina Isaka[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Yusuke Miyazato[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Tetsuya Suzuki[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Taketomo Maruki[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Gen Yamada[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Kohei Kamegai[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Yutaro Akiyama[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Satoshi Ide[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Masami Kurokawa[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Ataru Moriya[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Kazuhisa Mezaki[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Shintaro Yagi[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Hisashi Nojima[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Kentaro Yamakawa[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Norio Ohmagari[SUP] 1 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 36089257
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jiac.2022.09.001
Abstract
Introduction: Anterior nasal sampling (AN) might be more convenient for patients than NP sampling to diagnose coronavirus disease. This study investigated the feasibility of rapid antigen tests for AN sampling, and the factors affecting the test accuracy.
Methods: This single-center prospective study evaluated one qualitative (ESP) and two quantitative (LUMI and LUMI-P) rapid antigen tests using AN and NP swabs. Symptomatic patients aged 20 years or older, who were considered eligible for reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction using NP samples within 9 days of onset were recruited. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative concordance rates between AN and NP samples were assessed for the rapid antigen tests. We investigated the characteristics that affected the concordance between AN and NP sampling results.
Results: A total of 128 cases were recruited, including 28 positive samples and 100 negative samples. The sensitivity and specificity of AN samples using ESP were 0.81 and 1.00, while those of NP samples were 0.94 and 1.00. The sensitivity of AN and NP samples was 0.91 and 0.97, respectively, and specificity was 1.00, for both LUMI and LUMI-P. The positive concordance rates of AN to NP sampling were 0.87, 0.94, and 0.85 for ESP, LUMI, and LUMI-P, respectively. No factor had a significant effect on the concordance between the sampling methods.
Conclusions: ESP, LUMI, and LUMI-P showed practical diagnostic accuracy for AN sampling compared to NP sampling. There was no significant factor affecting the concordance between AN and NP sampling for these rapid antigen tests.
Keywords: COVID-19; Espline; Lumipulse; SARS-CoV-2; anterior nasal; rapid antigen test.