Search

* Context.--The use of saliva samples for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection offers several advantages, including ease of sample collection, feasibility of self-collection, and minimization of medical staff exposure to infection. The emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants has had an impact on the viral load of specimens and the results of real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). Objective.--To compare nasopharyngeal swab and saliva samples for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 using rRT-PCR. Design.--In this study, participants were recruited prospectively, and paired nasopharyngeal swab and saliva samples were collected simultaneously from each participant. After adding universal transport medium, RNA was extracted in an identical manner for both sample types, and samples were tested using rRT-PCR. In addition, samples with positive results were tested for SARS-CoV-2 variants. Results.--Of the 338 paired samples, 100 nasopharyngeal swab and 101 saliva samples tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The rRT-PCR results of the saliva and nasopharyngeal swab samples showed a positive percent agreement of 95.0% (95% CI, 88.7%-98.4%), a negative percent agreement of 97.9% (95% CI, 95.2%-99.3%), and an overall percent agreement of 96.8% (95% CI, 94.3%-98.4%). SARS-CoV-2 was detected in the saliva samples of 6 participants with negative nasopharyngeal sample results. In addition, the sensitivity of saliva samples was similar to that of nasopharyngeal samples for detecting various SARS-CoV-2 variants, including the Omicron variant. Conclusions.--Saliva samples can be used as an alternative to nasopharyngeal samples for convenient and effective detection of various SARS-CoV-2 variants., Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) is considered the gold standard method for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. (1) The standard sample type for performing rRT-PCR is a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab collected [...]