期刊文献+

鼻拭子与咽拭子两种取样方法在新型冠状病毒肺炎核酸筛检中的比较研究 被引量:49

A comparative study of nasal and pharyngeal swabs in the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的探讨新型冠状病毒肺炎(简称新冠肺炎)病毒核酸检测中相对方便安全及敏感度高的方法。方法对武汉市红十字会医院100例新冠肺炎病例同时留取咽拭子和鼻拭子。比较两种方法取样后样本核酸检测的阳性率。结果咽拭子取样标本SARS-CoV-2病毒核酸阳性检出率为54%,而鼻拭子取样标本的病毒核酸阳性率为89%。鼻拭子标本的病毒核酸阳性率高于咽拭子采样标本,差异有统计学意义(χ~2=3.850 4,P=0.049 7)。结论新冠肺炎患者取鼻拭子进行核酸检测的阳性检出率具有明显优势。临床应尽可能使用鼻拭子而非咽拭子作为新冠肺炎患者的优选筛检方式。 Objective To investigate a more convenient and safe sampling method for viral nucleic acid detection of coronavirus disease 2019. Methods An oropharyngeal swab and nasopharyngeal swab were simultaneously taken from 100 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 in a hospital in Wuhan. Then the efficacies of two sampling methods were compared on the positive rates of viral nucleic acid detection. Results The positive rate for SARS-CoV-2 was 54%in oropharyngeal swabs, while 89% positive in nasopharyngeal swabs. There was a significant difference in the detection rate between oropharyngeal swab and nasopharyngeal swab(χ2=3.850 4, P=0.049 7). Conclusions The positive rate for nucleic acid testing from nasopharyngeal swabs are significantly better than that from oropharyngeal swabs. Therefore,sampling by nasopharyngeal swabs, rather than oropharyngeal swabs, should be chosen as the preferred virological screening method for patients with coronavirus disease 2019.
作者 刘焱斌 刘涛 崔跃 王博 罗凤鸣 LIU Yanbin;LIU Tao;CUI Yue;WANG Bo;LUO Fengming(Center of Infectious Diseases,West China Hospital,Sichuan University,Chengdu,Sichuan 610041,P.R.China;The Red Cross Hospital of Wuhan(The Eleventh Hospital of Wuhan City),Wuhan,Hubei 430015,P.R.China;Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine,West China Hospital,Sichuan University,Chengdu,Sichuan 610041,P.R.China)
出处 《中国呼吸与危重监护杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2020年第2期141-143,共3页 Chinese Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
关键词 新型冠状病毒肺炎 咽拭子 鼻拭子 核酸检测 Coronavirus disease 2019 Oropharyngeal swab Nasopharyngeal swab Nucleic acid detection
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献6

  • 1巴华杰,刘冰泉,马骏,朱爱华,林子清.Chelex-100法提取滤纸血痕DNA影响因素的比较[J].法医学杂志,2007,23(5):347-348. 被引量:9
  • 2Dalmaso G,Bini M,Paroni R,et al.Qualification of highrecovery,flocked swabs as compared to traditional rayon swabs for microbiological environmental monitoring of surfaces[J].PDA J Pharm Sci Technol,2008,62(3):191-199.
  • 3Daley P,Castriciano S,Chernesky M,et al.Comparison of flocked and rayon swabs for collection of respiratory epithelial cells from uninfected volunteers and symptomatic patients[J].J Clin Microbiol,2006,44(6):2265-2267.
  • 4Benschop C C,Wiebosch D C,Kloosterman A D,et al.Post-coital vaginal sampling with nylon flocked swabs improves DNA typing[J].Forensic Sci Int Genet,2010,4(2):115-121.
  • 5Brownlow R J,Dagnall K E,Ames C E.A comparison of DNA collection and retrieval from two swab types(cotton and nylon flocked swab)when processed using three QIAGENextraction methods[J].J Forensic Sci,2012,57(3):713-717.
  • 6巴华杰,林子清,刘亚楠,刘冰泉,马骏,朱爱华.5种免提取试剂盒检验滤纸血痕结果的比较[J].中国法医学杂志,2013,28(1):49-51. 被引量:12

共引文献4

同被引文献302

引证文献49

二级引证文献110

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部