Articles: sars-cov-2.
-
J. Clin. Microbiol. · Jul 2020
Comparative StudyPerformance of Abbott ID Now COVID-19 Rapid Nucleic Acid Amplification Test Using Nasopharyngeal Swabs Transported in Viral Transport Media and Dry Nasal Swabs in a New York City Academic Institution.
The recent emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has posed formidable challenges for clinical laboratories seeking reliable laboratory diagnostic confirmation. The swift advance of the crisis in the United States has led to Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) facilitating the availability of molecular diagnostic assays without the more rigorous examination to which tests are normally subjected prior to FDA approval. Our laboratory currently uses two real-time reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) platforms, the Roche Cobas SARS-CoV2 and the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2. ⋯ In search for a platform with a shorter turnaround time, we sought to evaluate the recently released Abbott ID Now COVID-19 assay, which is capable of producing positive results in as little as 5 min. We present here the results of comparisons between Abbott ID Now COVID-19 and Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 using nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral transport media and comparisons between Abbott ID Now COVID-19 and Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 using nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral transport media for Cepheid and dry nasal swabs for Abbott ID Now. Regardless of method of collection and sample type, Abbott ID Now COVID-19 had negative results in a third of the samples that tested positive by Cepheid Xpert Xpress when using nasopharyngeal swabs in viral transport media and 45% when using dry nasal swabs.
-
J. Clin. Microbiol. · Jul 2020
Review Comparative StudyComparative Pathogenesis of Bovine and Porcine Respiratory Coronaviruses in the Animal Host Species and SARS-CoV-2 in Humans.
Discovery of bats with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-related coronaviruses (CoVs) raised the specter of potential future outbreaks of zoonotic SARS-CoV-like disease in humans, which largely went unheeded. Nevertheless, the novel SARS-CoV-2 of bat ancestral origin emerged to infect humans in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 and then became a global pandemic. Less than 5 months after its emergence, millions of people worldwide have been infected asymptomatically or symptomatically and at least 360,000 have died. ⋯ BCoV also has a dual tropism for the respiratory and gastrointestinal tracts. These aspects, their interspecies transmission, and certain factors that impact disease severity in cattle parallel related facets of SARS-CoV or SARS-CoV-2 in humans. PRCV has a tissue tropism for the upper and lower respiratory tracts and a cellular tropism for type 1 and 2 pneumocytes in lung but is generally a mild infection unless complicated by other exacerbating factors, such as bacterial or viral coinfections and immunosuppression (corticosteroids).
-
J. Clin. Microbiol. · Jul 2020
Comparative StudyComparison of Two Commercial Molecular Tests and a Laboratory-Developed Modification of the CDC 2019-nCoV Reverse Transcriptase PCR Assay for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2.
We compared the ability of 2 commercial molecular amplification assays (RealTime SARS-CoV-2 on the m2000 [abbreviated ACOV; Abbott] and ID Now COVID-19 [abbreviated IDNOW; Abbott]) and a laboratory-developed test (modified CDC 2019-nCoV reverse transcriptase PCR [RT-PCR] assay with RNA extraction by eMag [bioMérieux] and amplification on QuantStudio 6 or ABI 7500 real-time PCR system [abbreviated CDC COV]) to detect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA in upper respiratory tract specimens. Discrepant results were adjudicated by medical record review. A total of 200 nasopharyngeal swab specimens in viral transport medium (VTM) were collected from symptomatic patients between 27 March and 9 April 2020. ⋯ Medical record review deemed all discrepant results to be true positives. The IDNOW test was the easiest to perform and provided a result in the shortest time but detected fewer cases of COVID-19. The ACOV assay detected more cases of COVID-19 than the CDC COV or IDNOW assays.