Is nasopharyngeal swab comparable with nasopharyngeal aspirate to detect SARS-CoV-2 in children? ================================================================================================ * Ester Capecchi * Giada Maria Di Pietro * Ester Luconi ## Abstract The tests currently used for the direct identification of SARS-CoV-2 include specimens taken from the upper and the lower respiratory tract. In our paediatric department all children undergo both nasopharyngeal swab and nasopharyngeal aspirate, performed from both nostrils, on admission and after 24 hours. We decided to compare these two methods of detection of SARS-CoV-2. Considering nasopharyngeal aspirate as the gold standard, we calculated sensitivities and specificities of nasopharyngeal swab. Based on our results, we suggest to prefer the collection of aspirates whenever possible. ## To the Editor In December 2019 appeared in China a novel coronavirus, designated as SARS-CoV-2, responsible for a pandemic respiratory disease, known as coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), with the Italian outbreak from February 2020. Children appear to have milder symptoms and less severe disease1. The tests currently used for the direct identification of SARS-CoV-2 include specimens taken from the upper and the lower respiratory tract2,3. Since the use of nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA) seemed to be better than nasopharyngeal swab (NS) to identify respiratory virus in paediatrics4,5 we decided to compare these methods in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in children. Children hospitalized in our paediatric department underwent NS (Copan-503CS01 nasopharingeal flocked swab) and NPA (Medicoplast mucus extractor 440-ch08), performed from both nostrils, on admission and after 24 hours. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was extracted from the paired samples through nucleic acid amplification, using the RT-PCR. From March 13th to May 22nd, 300 paired specimens (NS/NPA) collected from 136 patients (134 hospitalized and 2 outpatients) were tested for SARS-CoV-2. For clinical aims, we considered positive, to SARS-CoV-2 every patient whose NPA or NS or NPA/NS resulted positive or weak positive. Out of the 134 patients hospitalized, 18 children tested positive (prevalence 13.4%, 95% CI: 8.2%-20.4%); among the latter, 13 of them and 2 outpatient children were followed collecting their paired specimens until both resulted negative 24 hours apart. Of the 300 paired specimens evaluated: 276 were concordant, 24 were discordant, so the naïve concordance was 92.0% (95% CI: 88.3%-94.6%) with Cohen’s kappa (K) 0.63. Among the paired specimens whose NPA resulted positive, 41.9% (95% CI: 28.2%-56.9%) had NS negative; while among the paired specimens whose NPA resulted negative, 2.3% (95% CI: 1.1%-5.1%) had NS positive. Considering NPA as the gold standard for detection of SARS-CoV-2, we calculated sensitivities and specificities of NS. The overall sensitivity of NS was 58.1% (95% CI: 43.1%-71.8%) and the specificity was 97.7% (95% CI: 94.9-98.9%). Since the different practice in specimen collection, we divided our cohort according to the children’s age (<6 or ≥ 6 years, Table 1). Among children under 6 years, the concordance was K=0.67. Regarding children of 6 years or older, the concordance was K=0.60. View this table: [Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/07/05/2020.07.02.20142521/T1) Table 1. NS and NPA results The NS has in any case a low sensitivity in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in children when referred to NPA. Our results, the first we know are available, suggest to prefer the collection of NPA whenever possible for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in children. ## Data Availability all data of the study are available ## Footnotes * **Other authors:** Giada Maria Di Pietro, MD, University of Milan, Milan, Italy, Via della Commenda 9, 20122, Milan, Italy, Ph: 39 02 5503 2469, email: giada.dipietro{at}unimi.it, Ester, Luconi, MSc, Foundation IRCCS Ca’ Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Via della Commenda 9, 20122, Milan, Italy, Ph: 39 02 5503 2469, email: ester.luconi91{at}gmail.com * **Funding Source:** No funding was secured for this study. * **Financial Disclosure:** The authors have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose. * **Conflict of Interest:** The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article to disclose. * Received July 2, 2020. * Revision received July 2, 2020. * Accepted July 5, 2020. * © 2020, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory The copyright holder for this pre-print is the author. All rights reserved. The material may not be redistributed, re-used or adapted without the author's permission. ## References 1. 1.Ludvigsson JF. Systematic Review of COVID-19 in Children Shows Milder Cases and a Better Prognosis Than Adults. Acta Paediatr 2020;109:1088–1095. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/apa.15270&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F07%2F05%2F2020.07.02.20142521.atom) 2. 2.Mawaddah A, Gendeh HS, Lum SG, Marina MB. Upper Respiratory Tract Sampling in COVID-19. Malays J Pathol 2020;42:23–35. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F07%2F05%2F2020.07.02.20142521.atom) 3. 3.Loeffelholz MJ, Tang YW. Laboratory Diagnosis of Emerging Human Coronavirus Infections - The State of the Art. Emerg Microbes Infect 2020;9:747–756. 4. 4.Lambert SB, Whiley DM, O’Neill NT, et al. Comparing Nose-Throat Swabs and Nasopharyngeal Aspirates Collected From Children With Symptoms for Respiratory Virus Identification Using Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction. Pediatrics 2008;122:e615–20. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTA6InBlZGlhdHJpY3MiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6MTA6IjEyMi8zL2U2MTUiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMC8wNy8wNS8yMDIwLjA3LjAyLjIwMTQyNTIxLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 5. 5.Macfarlane P, Denham J, Assous J, Hughes C. RSV Testing in Bronchiolitis: Which Nasal Sampling Method Is Best? Arch Dis Child 2005;90:634–5. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTI6ImFyY2hkaXNjaGlsZCI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo4OiI5MC82LzYzNCI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIwLzA3LzA1LzIwMjAuMDcuMDIuMjAxNDI1MjEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9)