Bilah Samping Artikel

Telah diserahkan
December 13, 2021
Diterima
June 21, 2022
Diterbitkan
June 29, 2022
Unduh
PDF
Statistik
Baca Penghitung : 223 Unduh : 284

Isi Artikel Utama

Abstrak

SARS CoV-2 infection, which has affected the world since late 2019, can cause serious lower respiratory tract infections that may be fatal in some patients. This infection causes the disease Covid-19. The diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection was carried out by NAAT (Nucleic Acid Amplification Test) such as RT-PCR examination. The sample needed for the identification of SARS-COV-2 is a nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swab. Nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swab sampling requires trained personnel. Taking a nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swab is invasive, causing discomfort in its implementation. The convenience of sampling specimens can be an alternative option for the identification of SARS-CoV-2, such as with newly developed biosaliva specimens. The use of this biosaliva sample can be a practical option in the examination of the identification of SARS-CoV-2. However, the use of these specimens needs to be evaluated first because of the possible relationship with clinical findings and so that the results of the SARS-CoV-2 examination are valid and reliable. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of biosaliva specimens to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection with the RT-PCR method. Evaluation of the use of biosaliva in the detection of SARS-COV-2 RT-PCR method with paired T test and diagnostic test with the gold standard using nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs. The target genes for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 are the RdRp gene and the E gene with control of the HRP gene. RT-PCR was carried out with 40 cycles and Tm 62 °C. The results of this study are Sig. (2-tailed) paired T test was 0.106, sensitivity was 64.86% and specificity was 90.92%. The conclusion of this study is that there is no statistical difference in the results of the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR method between the use of biosaliva specimens and nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs, and the evaluation results show that reliable biosaliva specimens are used as samples in the examination of SARS-COV-2 infection.

Rincian Artikel

Lisensi

 

This work is licensed under  Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

 

Biografi Penulis

Suryanata Kesuma, Poltekkes Kemenkes Kalimantan Timur

Prodi DIII Teknologi Laboratorium Medis

Suparno Putera Makkadafi, Poltekkes Kemenkes Kalimantan Timur

Prodi DIII Teknologi Laboratorium Medis

Referensi

  1. Akgun, O. et al. (2020) ‘Does sampling saliva increase detection of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR Comparing saliva with oro-nasopharyngeal swabs’, (January).
  2. Becker D., Sandoval E., Amin A., De Hoff P., Diets A., Leonetti N., L. Y. . and Elliott C., Laurent L., Grzymski J., L. J. (2020) ‘Saliva is less sensitive than nasopharyngeal swabs for COVID-19 detection in the community setting’.
  3. Butler-Laporte, G. et al. (2021) ‘Comparison of Saliva and Nasopharyngeal Swab Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing for Detection of SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis’, JAMA Internal Medicine, 181(3), pp. 353–360. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.8876.
  4. Byrne, R. L. et al. (2020) ‘Saliva offers a sensitive, specific and non-invasive alternative to upper respiratory swabs for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.’, medRxiv, p. 2020.07.09.20149534. doi: 10.1101/2020.07.09.20149534.
  5. Caulley, L. et al. (2021) ‘Salivary detection of covid-19’, Annals of Internal Medicine, 174(1), pp. 131–133. doi: 10.7326/M20-4738.
  6. Hidayat, R. et al. (2011) ‘Metodologi Penelitian Psikodiagnostika’, 19(2), pp. 81–92.
  7. Huang, C. et al. (2020) ‘Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China’, The Lancet, 395(January), pp. 497–506.
  8. Kadarman, J. T., Anggriyani, N. and Wiryawan, W. (2016) ‘PERBANDINGAN SENSITIVITAS DAN SPESIFISITAS ANKLE- BRACHIAL INDEX DENGAN CAROTID INTIMA-MEDIA THICKNESS DALAM MENDETEKSI PENYAKIT JANTUNG KORONER’, 5(4), pp. 1111–1124.
  9. Lai, A. L. et al. (2020) ‘COVID-19: towards controlling of a pandemic’, the Lancet, 395(April), p. 1315. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2002032.9.
  10. Lippi, G., Simundic, A. M. and Plebani, M. (2020) ‘Potential preanalytical and analytical vulnerabilities in the laboratory diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)’, Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 58(7), pp. 1070–1076. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2020-0285.
  11. Miller, M. et al. (2020) ‘Validation of a Self-administrable, Saliva-based RT-qPCR Test Detecting SARS-CoV-’, pp. 1–18.
  12. To, K. K. et al. (2020) ‘Consistent Detection of 2019 Novel Coronavirus in Saliva’, (Xx Xxxx), pp. 4–6. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa149.
  13. Zion Congrave-Wilson, M. et al. (2021) ‘Change in Saliva RT-PCR Sensitivity Over the Course of SARS-CoV-2 Infection’, Annals of Internal Medicine, 174(9), pp. 1330–1332. doi: 10.7326/L21-0282.