Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T16:04:03.922Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Diagnostic options for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2020

Yuanyuan Xiao
Affiliation:
Xiangya Hospital Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, China
Zhong Peng
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Agricultural Microbiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan430070, Hubei, China
Caixia Tan
Affiliation:
Xiangya Hospital Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, China
Xiujuan Meng
Affiliation:
Xiangya Hospital Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, China
Xun Huang
Affiliation:
Xiangya Hospital Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, China National Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Disorders (Xiangya Hospital), Changsha, Hunan Province, China
Anhua Wu*
Affiliation:
Xiangya Hospital Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, China National Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Disorders (Xiangya Hospital), Changsha, Hunan Province, China
Chunhui Li*
Affiliation:
Xiangya Hospital Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, China National Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Disorders (Xiangya Hospital), Changsha, Hunan Province, China
*
Authors for correspondence: Chunhui Li, Email: lichunhui@csu.edu.cn. Or Anhua Wu, Email: xywuanhua@csu.edu.cn
Authors for correspondence: Chunhui Li, Email: lichunhui@csu.edu.cn. Or Anhua Wu, Email: xywuanhua@csu.edu.cn
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Letter to the Editor
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© 2020 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved.

To the Editor—The COVID-19 pandemic is posing a great challenge to global health and economy. Early accurate diagnosis plays a key role in fighting the disease. However, the diagnosis might be missed because of false-negative tests due to the insufficient sensitivity of the only test that detects SARS-CoV-2 or coinfection with other viruses. These false-negative results will affect clinical management decisions as well as control of the epidemic. Therefore, broader viral tests should be given to patients suspected to have COVID-19. Here, we discuss the existing methods of diagnosing COVID-19.

Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT)

The current first choice for the etiological diagnosis of COVID-19 is based on detection of unique sequences of virus RNA by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR).1 The PCR test is appropriate for the acute phase of illness; however, cases of missed diagnoses have already been reported using this method.Reference Shi, Han and Jiang2,Reference Chan, Yip and To3 Recently, related research shows that the COVID-19-RdRp/Hel rRT-PCR test is highly sensitive and specific, which might help to reduce the false-negative rate and would be significantly useful for detecting specimens with low viral loads.Reference Chan, Yip and To3 Thus, in terms of technical and financial support, the current rRT-PCR testing available is relatively optimal for SARS-CoV-2 screening of suspected cases.

Viral sequencing

The application of next-generation sequencing may be an accurate diagnosis method for SARS-CoV-2, including metagenomics, hybrid capture-based sequencing, and amplicon-based next-generation sequencing.1,4,Reference Xiao, Liu and Ji5 These 3 approaches show a higher sensitivity than conventional RT-PCR, and they can meet the need for secondary detection, diagnosis confirmation, and large-scale detection of RT-PCR false-negative results.Reference Xiao, Liu and Ji5 However, high cost is currently an important obstacle to more widespread use of virus sequencing.

Serological testing

For patients with COVID-19, detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are mainly divided into IgM and IgG. In general, most of SARS-CoV-2–specific IgM antibodies can be detected 3–5 days after onset, and during the recovery period, IgG antibody titers are ≥4 times higher than in the acute phase.4,Reference Zhao, Yuan and Wang6 An antibody test is appropriate for the convalescence phase of COVID-19 in case of a symptomatic infection. This method, however, is susceptible to the presence of some interfering substances in the blood sample (eg, rheumatoid factor, nonspecific IgM, etc), and therefore, it has a very high false-positive rate. Hence, SARS-CoV-2–specific IgM or IgG antibody testing can be used as a diagnostic standard for COVID-19 in the case of a negative NAAT, when 2 dynamic tests are required.1,Reference Zhao, Yuan and Wang6

Rapid antigen tests

In theory, rapid antigen tests have the advantages of fast detection speed and low cost, but as yet they have poor sensitivity and specificity for detecting coronaviruses (except MERS).Reference Chen, Chan and Hong7 Moreover, it is almost impossible to identify patients in the incubation period of infection, which is to say that antigen tests cannot be used as the sole basis for the diagnosis or exclusion of COVID-19. A pre–peer-reviewed article reported that a fluorescence immunochromatographic assay is an accurate, rapid, early and simple method for detecting the nucleocapsid protein of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swab samples and urine samples for the diagnosis of COVID-19.Reference Diao, Wen and Chen8 This claim requires further investigation.

Imaging examinations

Because lung abnormalities may appear ahead of clinical manifestations and positive NAAT, some studies have recommended that early chest computerized tomography (CT) be used to screen suspected cases of COVID-19.Reference Shi, Han and Jiang2,4,Reference Xu, Yu and Qu9,Reference Peng, Wang and Zhang10 Furthermore, pneumonia manifests with chest CT imaging and suggests the evolution and prognosis of COVID-19.Reference Shi, Han and Jiang2,Reference Peng, Wang and Zhang10 Nevertheless, due to the highly contagious nature of SARS-CoV-2 and the risk of transporting critically ill patients, the choice to conduct a chest CT scan in patients with suspected or established COVID-19 is made infrequently. In addition, lung ultrasonography may have great utility in managing COVID-19 pneumonia due to its safety, repeatability, absence of radiation, low cost, and point-of-care use.Reference Xu, Yu and Qu9 For cases in which pulmonary ultrasound is not sufficient to answer clinical questions, a chest CT is needed.

In summary, combining assessment of imaging features with clinical and laboratory findings could facilitate early diagnosis of COVID-19. Here, we have systematically summarized the various diagnostic methods for SARS-CoV-2. More importantly, this work offers practical options for diagnosing COVID-19. Our experience may help clinicians make better decisions in the effort to become victorious over SARS-CoV-2.

Acknowledgments

None.

Financial support

This work was supported by the Research Fund of Emergency Project of Prevention and Control for COVID-19 of Central South University (grant no. 160260003).

Conflicts of interest

All authors report no conflicts of interest related to this work.

References

Laboratory testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in suspected human cases. World Health Organization website. https://www.who.int/publications-detail/laboratory-testing-for-2019-novel-coronavirus-in-suspected-human-cases-20200117. Published 2020. Accessed April 8, 2020.Google Scholar
Shi, H, Han, X, Jiang, N, et al. Radiological findings from 81 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet Infect Dis 2020;20:425434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chan, JF, Yip, CC, To, KK, et al. Improved molecular diagnosis of COVID-19 by the novel, highly sensitive and specific COVID-19-RdRp/Hel real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction assay validated and with clinical specimens. J Clin Microbiol 2020 Mar 4 [Epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00310-20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
The diagnosical and therapeutic scheme for COVID-19 (trial version 7). National Health Commission of the Peoples Republic of China website. http://www.nhc.gov.cn/xcs/zhengcwj/202003/46c9294a7dfe4cef80dc7f5912eb1989.shtml. Published 2020. Accessed April 8, 2020.Google Scholar
Xiao, MF, Liu, XQ, Ji, JK, et al. Multiple approaches for massively parallel sequencing of HCoV-19 genomes directly from clinical samples. bioRxiv 2020. doi: 10.1101/2020.03.16.993584Google Scholar
Zhao, J,Yuan, Q,Wang, H, et al. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019. Clin Infect Dis 2020 [Epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, Y, Chan, KH, Hong, C, et al. A highly specific rapid antigen detection assay for on-site diagnosis of MERS. J Infect 2016;73:8284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diao, B, Wen, K, Chen, J, et al. Diagnosis of acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection by detection of nucleocapsid protein. medRxiv 2020. doi: 10.1101/2020.03.07.20032524.Google Scholar
Xu, X, Yu, C, Qu, J, et al. Imaging and clinical features of patients with 2019 novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020;47:12751280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peng, QY, Wang, XT, Zhang, LN. Findings of lung ultrasonography of novel corona virus pneumonia during the 2019–2020 epidemic. Intensive Care Med 2020 Mar 12 [Epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1007/s00134-020-05996-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed