» Articles » PMID: 20702662

Comparison of Combined Nose-throat Swabs with Nasopharyngeal Aspirates for Detection of Pandemic Influenza A/H1N1 2009 Virus by Real-time Reverse Transcriptase PCR

Overview
Specialty Microbiology
Date 2010 Aug 13
PMID 20702662
Citations 25
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Data assessing the diagnostic accuracies of use of different respiratory samples for the detection of the novel influenza A/H1N1 2009 virus by molecular methods are lacking. The objective of this study was to compare the sensitivity of combined nose and throat swabs (CNTS) with that of nasopharyngeal aspirates (NPA). This was a prospective study of adults and children with suspected influenza. Real-time reverse transcriptase PCR testing was used for the virological diagnosis. Of the 2,473 patients included, 264 with paired CNTS and NPA were randomly selected. Novel influenza A/H1N1 virus was identified in at least one sample for 115 (43.6%) patients, the majority of them young adults. In 109 patients (94.8%) the virus was identified in the CNTS, and in 98 (85.2%) it was identified in the NPA (P = 0.02). In 93 patients (80.1%), the virus was identified in both specimens. Spearman's rho correlation coefficient between the two methods was 0.82 (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in accuracy between the specimens when patients were stratified according to demographic or clinical characteristics except in the case of women, in whom the sensitivity of CNTS was higher (P = 0.01). The combination of CNTS and NPA had a significantly higher sensitivity in identifying the virus than did each method alone (P = 0.02 for the comparison of the combination of both sampling methods with CNTS, and P < 0.001 for the comparison with NPA). We conclude that in patients with the novel influenza A/H1N1 virus, the diagnostic yield of CNTS is higher than that of NPA. The combination of both sampling methods increases the likelihood of diagnosing the virus.

Citing Articles

Factors Affecting Procedural Pain and Discomfort Experienced by Individuals During Nasopharyngeal Swabbing: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Dogan U, Karatas G, Mihrap Ilter S Florence Nightingale J Nurs. 2024; 32(3):215-220.

PMID: 39530582 PMC: 11562252. DOI: 10.5152/FNJN.2024.22289.


Taiwanese Guidelines for Molecular Point-of-Care Testing for Influenza in Emergency Medicine From the New Diagnostic Technology Team of the Taiwan Society of Emergency Medicine.

Lee C, Liu Y J Acute Med. 2023; 13(2):47-57.

PMID: 37465825 PMC: 10351401. DOI: 10.6705/j.jacme.202306_13(2).0001.


Comparing variability in diagnosis of upper respiratory tract infections in patients using syndromic, next generation sequencing, and PCR-based methods.

Bartlow A, Stromberg Z, Gleasner C, Hu B, Davenport K, Jakhar S PLOS Glob Public Health. 2023; 2(7):e0000811.

PMID: 36962439 PMC: 10022352. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000811.


Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in combined nasal-and-throat swabs collected from COVID-19 individuals under the Universal Community Testing Programme in Hong Kong.

Mak G, Ng A, Lam E, Chan R, Tsang D J Virol Methods. 2021; 300:114396.

PMID: 34856306 PMC: 8629508. DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2021.114396.


Comparison of detection rate of 16 sampling methods for respiratory viruses: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of clinical data and systematic review.

Hou N, Wang K, Zhang H, Bai M, Chen H, Song W BMJ Glob Health. 2020; 5(11).

PMID: 33168521 PMC: 7654123. DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003053.


References
1.
Loens K, Van Heirstraeten L, Malhotra-Kumar S, Goossens H, Ieven M . Optimal sampling sites and methods for detection of pathogens possibly causing community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections. J Clin Microbiol. 2008; 47(1):21-31. PMC: 2620840. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02037-08. View

2.
McIntosh K, Halonen P, Ruuskanen O . Report of a workshop on respiratory viral infections: epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. Clin Infect Dis. 1993; 16(1):151-64. PMC: 7110003. DOI: 10.1093/clinids/16.1.151. View

3.
Wicker S, Rabenau H, Bias H, Groneberg D, Gottschalk R . Influenza A (H1N1) 2009: Impact on Frankfurt in due consideration of health care and public health. J Occup Med Toxicol. 2010; 5:10. PMC: 2868035. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6673-5-10. View

4.
Chan P, To W, Ng K, Lam R, Ng T, Chan R . Laboratory diagnosis of SARS. Emerg Infect Dis. 2004; 10(5):825-31. PMC: 3323215. DOI: 10.3201/eid1005.030682. View

5.
Perez-Padilla R, Rosa-Zamboni D, Ponce de Leon S, Hernandez M, Quinones-Falconi F, Bautista E . Pneumonia and respiratory failure from swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) in Mexico. N Engl J Med. 2009; 361(7):680-9. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0904252. View