Comparison of nasopharyngeal flocked swabs and aspirates for rapid diagnosis of respiratory viruses in children
Introduction
Acute respiratory infections are the most common illnesses of otherwise healthy adults and children and most of these infections are caused by viruses (Treanor, 2002). Furthermore, novel emerging viral respiratory infections (e.g. SARS) have the potential to cause explosive disease outbreaks with huge impact on economies and society in general (Peiris et al., 2004). Rapid viral diagnosis leads to optimized clinical care, reduced antibiotic use, helps infection control and is cost effective (Woo et al., 1997). Antigen detection methods have been commonly used for rapid respiratory viral diagnosis but PCR-based methods are now becoming more widely used. In all these methods the type and quality of the clinical specimen is of utmost importance. Nasopharyngeal aspirates (NPA) are generally considered the best specimens for rapid detection of respiratory viruses (Ahluwalia et al., 1987, Zambon, 1998, Macfarlane et al., 2005). However, obtaining a NPA is unpleasant to the patient, requires specialized equipment and a skilled operator for specimen collection and therefore difficult to obtain in an out-patient or field setting. Nasal swab specimens have been found to be less productive than NPA in some studies (Macfarlane et al., 2005) but not in others (Heikkinen et al., 2002). Nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) have been reported by some to have comparable positivity rates to NPA (Frayha et al., 1989) although this is still controversial (Ahluwalia et al., 1987). Compared to NPA, conventional NPS swabs usually yield fewer epithelial cells for direct antigen detection by IF assay (Ahluwalia et al., 1987).
Recently a flocked-nasopharyngeal swab was designed with the aim of improving the yield of nasopharyngeal epithelial cells and enhancing diagnostic yield (Copan Diagnostics, Corona, CA). A study showed that flocked swabs yielded more cells and provided better clinical specimen when compared with nasal swab (Daley et al., 2006, Chernesky et al., 2006). However, there are still no direct comparisons between nasopharyngeal flocked swabs (NPFS) and NPA for the rapid diagnosis of respiratory viruses by direct immunofluorescence assay and PCR. We conducted a prospective study in children with acute respiratory disease comparing NPFS with NPA for the detection of influenza A and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) by PCR and direct immunofluorescence (DIF) assays. We also compared the viral nucleic acid load in parallel NPA and NPFS specimens using quantitative real time PCR.
Section snippets
Patients and specimens
One hundred ninety-six hospitalized children under 18 years of age with acute respiratory tract infections at Queen Mary hospital from February to May 2007 were recruited. The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee of Queen Mary Hospital and written informed consent was obtained prior to recruitment. NPA and NPFS were collected in parallel from each patient. The NPA specimen was collected from one nostril and the NPS specimen from the other. Initially, children were randomized to
Diagnostic yield by NPA and NPFS specimens
Paired NPA and NPFS were collected from one hundred ninety-six pediatric patients recruited during February to May 2007 which is the peak influenza A and RSV season in Hong Kong. There were 113 males and 83 females with the mean age 6.3 months, range 1–89 months. RT-PCR was done on all specimens for influenza A and RSV. DIF was done on all specimens for influenza A and B, RSV, parainfluenza type 1, 2, 3 and adenovirus. Virus culture was done for all NPA specimens. RT-PCR or PCR was done for
Discussion
We compared the NPFS and NPA collected in parallel from 196 hospitalized pediatric patients for diagnosis of respiratory infections by DFA tests and for diagnosis of influenza A and RSV by RT-PCR. The reason for focusing on influenza A and RSV for the RT-PCR study was that these viruses were known to be the predominant respiratory virus infections occurring during the period of the study.
Specimens from either method yielded epithelial cells of good morphology and in adequate numbers for
Acknowledgements
We thank C.M. Pang, K.M. Chan and S.Y. Lam for technical assistance. We acknowledge research grants from the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong (HKU 7396/03M), Special Research Achievement Award from The University of Hong Kong to J.S.M.P. (10205969) and Research Fund for the Control of Infectious Diseases of Hong Kong Grant 04050492.
References (16)
- et al.
Clinical assessment of a generic DNA amplification assay for the identification of respiratory adenovirus infections
J Clin Virol
(2003) - et al.
Comparison of nasopharyngeal aspirate and nasopharyngeal swab specimens for respiratory syncytial virus diagnosis by cell culture, indirect immunofluorescence assay, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
J Clin Microbiol
(1987) - et al.
Evaluation of the Directigen FluA + B test for rapid diagnosis of influenza virus type A and B infections
J Clin Microbiol
(2002) - et al.
Use of flocked swabs and a universal transport medium to enhance molecular detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae
J Clin Microbial
(2006) - et al.
Comparison of flocked and rayon swabs for collection of respiratory epithelial cells from uninfected volunteers and symptomatic patients
J Clin Microbiol
(2006) - et al.
Nasopharyngeal swabs and nasopharyngeal aspirates equally effective for the diagnosis of viral respiratory disease in hospitalized children
J Clin Microbiol
(1989) - et al.
Practical implementation of a multiplex PCR for acute respiratory tract infections in children
J Clin Microbiol
(2004) - et al.
Nasal swab versus nasopharyngeal aspirate for isolation of respiratory viruses
J Clin Microbiol
(2002)
Cited by (124)
A systematic review on materials, design, and manufacturing of swabs
2023, Annals of 3D Printed MedicineStandardization of a high-performance RT-qPCR for viral load absolute quantification of influenza A
2022, Journal of Virological MethodsLaboratory testing for the diagnosis of COVID-19
2021, Biochemical and Biophysical Research CommunicationsCitation Excerpt :Upper respiratory specimens are recommended for making clinical diagnosis of active disease in symptomatic cases in early-stage infections or asymptomatic persons. Nasopharyngeal specimens, especially nasopharyngeal aspirates (NPA) were traditionally considered the specimen of choice for making diagnosis of respiratory viral infections, giving the highest yield in viral detection, such as in Influenza A [5,6]. With the potential risk of generating aerosols during the suction in collecting NPA [7], we do not recommended collecting NPA for clinical diagnosis in COVID-19.
3D printing of nasopharyngeal swabs for COVID-19 diagnose: Past and current trends
2021, Materials Today: ProceedingsMicrobiological Diagnosis of Respiratory Illness: Recent Advances
2019, Kendig's Disorders of the Respiratory Tract in Children