Abstract
Background / Objectives The global spread of SARS-CoV-2 is a serious public health issue. Large-scale surveillance screenings are crucial but can exceed diagnostic test capacities. We set out to optimize test conditions and implemented high throughput pool testing of respiratory swabs into SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics.
Study design In preparation for pool testing, we determined the optimal pooling strategy and pool size. In addition, we measured the impact of vortexing prior to sample processing, compared pipette- and swab-pooling method as well as the sensitivity of three different PCR assays.
Results Using optimized strategies for pooling, we systematically pooled 55,690 samples in a period of 44 weeks resulting in a reduction of 47,369 PCR reactions. In a low prevalence setting, we defined a preferable pool size of ten in a two-stage hierarchical pool testing strategy. Vortexing of the swabs increased cellular yield by a factor of 2.34, and sampling at or shortly after symptom onset was associated with higher viral loads. By comparing different pooling strategies, pipette-pooling was more efficient compared to swab-pooling.
Conclusions For implementing pooling strategies into high throughput diagnostics, we recommend to apply a pipette-pooling method, using pool sizes of ten samples, performing sensitivity validation of the PCR assays used, and vortexing swabs prior to analyses. Our data shows, that pool testing for SARS-CoV-2 detection is feasible and highly effective in a low prevalence setting.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
no external funding was received for this study
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The entire study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (Ethics Committee) of the Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Germany (ethical vote no. 20-1638).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The collected data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
