24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Comprehensive Review of Detection Methods for SARS-CoV-2

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Recently, the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, in China and its subsequent spread across the world has caused numerous infections and deaths and disrupted normal social activity. Presently, various techniques are used for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, with various advantages and weaknesses to each. In this paper, we summarize promising methods, such as reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), serological testing, point-of-care testing, smartphone surveillance of infectious diseases, nanotechnology-based approaches, biosensors, amplicon-based metagenomic sequencing, smartphone, and wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) that can also be utilized for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. In addition, we discuss principles, advantages, and disadvantages of these detection methods, and highlight the potential methods for the development of additional techniques and products for early and fast detection of SARS-CoV-2.

          Related collections

          Most cited references105

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          First Case of 2019 Novel Coronavirus in the United States

          Summary An outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) that began in Wuhan, China, has spread rapidly, with cases now confirmed in multiple countries. We report the first case of 2019-nCoV infection confirmed in the United States and describe the identification, diagnosis, clinical course, and management of the case, including the patient’s initial mild symptoms at presentation with progression to pneumonia on day 9 of illness. This case highlights the importance of close coordination between clinicians and public health authorities at the local, state, and federal levels, as well as the need for rapid dissemination of clinical information related to the care of patients with this emerging infection.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Timely mental health care for the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak is urgently needed

            The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) pneumonia, believed to have originated in a wet market in Wuhan, Hubei province, China at the end of 2019, has gained intense attention nationwide and globally. To lower the risk of further disease transmission, the authority in Wuhan suspended public transport indefinitely from Jan 23, 2020; similar measures were adopted soon in many other cities in China. As of Jan 25, 2020, 30 Chinese provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions covering over 1·3 billion people have initiated first-level responses to major public health emergencies. A range of measures has been urgently adopted,1, 2 such as early identification and isolation of suspected and diagnosed cases, contact tracing and monitoring, collection of clinical data and biological samples from patients, dissemination of regional and national diagnostic criteria and expert treatment consensus, establishment of isolation units and hospitals, and prompt provision of medical supplies and external expert teams to Hubei province. The emergence of the 2019-nCoV pneumonia has parallels with the 2003 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which was caused by another coronavirus that killed 349 of 5327 patients with confirmed infection in China. 3 Although the diseases have different clinical presentations,1, 4 the infectious cause, epidemiological features, fast transmission pattern, and insufficient preparedness of health authorities to address the outbreaks are similar. So far, mental health care for the patients and health professionals directly affected by the 2019-nCoV epidemic has been under-addressed, although the National Health Commission of China released the notification of basic principles for emergency psychological crisis interventions for the 2019-nCoV pneumonia on Jan 26, 2020. 5 This notification contained a reference to mental health problems and interventions that occurred during the 2003 SARS outbreak, and mentioned that mental health care should be provided for patients with 2019-nCoV pneumonitis, close contacts, suspected cases who are isolated at home, patients in fever clinics, families and friends of affected people, health professionals caring for infected patients, and the public who are in need. To date, epidemiological data on the mental health problems and psychiatric morbidity of those suspected or diagnosed with the 2019-nCoV and their treating health professionals have not been available; therefore how best to respond to challenges during the outbreak is unknown. The observations of mental health consequences and measures taken during the 2003 SARS outbreak could help inform health authorities and the public to provide mental health interventions to those who are in need. Patients with confirmed or suspected 2019-nCoV may experience fear of the consequences of infection with a potentially fatal new virus, and those in quarantine might experience boredom, loneliness, and anger. Furthermore, symptoms of the infection, such as fever, hypoxia, and cough, as well as adverse effects of treatment, such as insomnia caused by corticosteroids, could lead to worsening anxiety and mental distress. 2019-nCoV has been repeatedly described as a killer virus, for example on WeChat, which has perpetuated the sense of danger and uncertainty among health workers and the public. In the early phase of the SARS outbreak, a range of psychiatric morbidities, including persistent depression, anxiety, panic attacks, psychomotor excitement, psychotic symptoms, delirium, and even suicidality, were reported.6, 7 Mandatory contact tracing and 14 days quarantine, which form part of the public health responses to the 2019-nCoV pneumonia outbreak, could increase patients' anxiety and guilt about the effects of contagion, quarantine, and stigma on their families and friends. Health professionals, especially those working in hospitals caring for people with confirmed or suspected 2019-nCoV pneumonia, are vulnerable to both high risk of infection and mental health problems. They may also experience fear of contagion and spreading the virus to their families, friends, or colleagues. Health workers in a Beijing hospital who were quarantined, worked in high-risk clinical settings such as SARS units, or had family or friends who were infected with SARS, had substantially more post-traumatic stress symptoms than those without these experiences. 8 Health professionals who worked in SARS units and hospitals during the SARS outbreak also reported depression, anxiety, fear, and frustration.6, 9 Despite the common mental health problems and disorders found among patients and health workers in such settings, most health professionals working in isolation units and hospitals do not receive any training in providing mental health care. Timely mental health care needs to be developed urgently. Some methods used in the SARS outbreak could be helpful for the response to the 2019-nCoV outbreak. First, multidisciplinary mental health teams established by health authorities at regional and national levels (including psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, clinical psychologists, and other mental health workers) should deliver mental health support to patients and health workers. Specialised psychiatric treatments and appropriate mental health services and facilities should be provided for patients with comorbid mental disorders. Second, clear communication with regular and accurate updates about the 2019-nCoV outbreak should be provided to both health workers and patients in order to address their sense of uncertainty and fear. Treatment plans, progress reports, and health status updates should be given to both patients and their families. Third, secure services should be set up to provide psychological counselling using electronic devices and applications (such as smartphones and WeChat) for affected patients, as well as their families and members of the public. Using safe communication channels between patients and families, such as smartphone communication and WeChat, should be encouraged to decrease isolation. Fourth, suspected and diagnosed patients with 2019-nCoV pneumonia as well as health professionals working in hospitals caring for infected patients should receive regular clinical screening for depression, anxiety, and suicidality by mental health workers. Timely psychiatric treatments should be provided for those presenting with more severe mental health problems. For most patients and health workers, emotional and behavioural responses are part of an adaptive response to extraordinary stress, and psychotherapy techniques such as those based on the stress-adaptation model might be helpful.7, 10 If psychotropic medications are used, such as those prescribed by psychiatrists for severe psychiatric comorbidities, 6 basic pharmacological treatment principles of ensuring minimum harm should be followed to reduce harmful effects of any interactions with 2019-nCoV and its treatments. In any biological disaster, themes of fear, uncertainty, and stigmatisation are common and may act as barriers to appropriate medical and mental health interventions. Based on experience from past serious novel pneumonia outbreaks globally and the psychosocial impact of viral epidemics, the development and implementation of mental health assessment, support, treatment, and services are crucial and pressing goals for the health response to the 2019-nCoV outbreak. © 2020 VW Pics/Science Photo Library 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sensitivity of Chest CT for COVID-19: Comparison to RT-PCR

              Summary In a series of 51 patients with chest CT and RT-PCR assay performed within 3 days, the sensitivity of CT for COVID-19 infection was 98% compared to RT-PCR sensitivity of 71% (p<.001). Introduction In December 2019, an outbreak of unexplained pneumonia in Wuhan [1] was caused by a new coronavirus infection named COVID-19 (Corona Virus Disease 2019). Noncontrast chest CT may be considered for early diagnosis of viral disease, although viral nucleic acid detection using real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) remains the standard of reference. Chung et al. reported that chest CT may be negative for viral pneumonia of COVID-19 [2] at initial presentation (3/21 patients). Recently, Xie reported 5/167 (3%) patients who had negative RT-PCR for COVID-19 at initial presentation despite chest CT findings typical of viral pneumonia [3]. The purpose of this study was to compare the sensitivity of chest CT and viral nucleic acid assay at initial patient presentation. Materials and Methods The retrospective analysis was approved by institutional review board and patient consent was waived. Patients at Taizhou Enze Medical Center (Group) Enze Hospital were evaluated from January 19, 2020 to February 4, 2020. During this period, chest CT and RT-PCR (Shanghai ZJ Bio-Tech Co, Ltd, Shanghai, China) was performed for consecutive patients who presented with a history of 1) travel or residential history in Wuhan or local endemic areas or contact with individuals with individuals with fever or respiratory symptoms from these areas within 14 days and 2) had fever or acute respiratory symptoms of unknown cause. In the case of an initial negative RT-PCR test, repeat testing was performed at intervals of 1 day or more. Of these patients, we included all patients who had both noncontrast chest CT scan (slice thickness, 5mm) and RT-PCR testing within an interval of 3 days or less and who had an eventual confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 infection by RT-PCR testing (Figure 1). Typical and atypical chest CT findings were recorded according to CT features previously described for COVD-19 (4,5). The detection rate of COVID-19 infection based on the initial chest CT and RT-PCR was compared. Statistical analysis was performed using McNemar Chi-squared test with significance at the p <.05 level. Figure 1: Flowchart for patient inclusion. Results 51 patients (29 men and 22 women) were included with median age of 45 (interquartile range, 39- 55) years. All patients had throat swab (45 patients) or sputum samples (6 patients) followed by one or more RT-PCR assays. The average time from initial disease onset to CT was 3 +/- 3 days; the average time from initial disease onset to RT-PCR testing was 3 +/- 3 days. 36/51 patients had initial positive RT-PCR for COVID-19. 12/51 patients had COVID-19 confirmed by two RT-PCR nucleic acid tests (1 to 2 days), 2 patients by three tests (2-5 days) and 1 patient by four tests (7 days) after initial onset. 50/51 (98%) patients had evidence of abnormal CT compatible with viral pneumonia at baseline while one patient had a normal CT. Of 50 patients with abnormal CT, 36 (72%) had typical CT manifestations (e.g. peripheral, subpleural ground glass opacities, often in the lower lobes (Figure 2) and 14 (28%) had atypical CT manifestations (Figure 3) [2]. In this patient sample, difference in detection rate for initial CT (50/51 [98%, 95% CI 90-100%]) patients was greater than first RT-PCR (36/51 [71%, 95%CI 56-83%]) patients (p<.001). Figure 2a: Examples of typical chest CT findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 74 years old with fever and cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows bilateral subpleural ground glass opacities (GGO). B, female, 55 years old, with fever and cough for 7 days. Axial chest CT shows extensive bilateral ground glass opacities and consolidation; C, male, 43 years old, presenting with fever and cough for 1 week. Axial chest CT shows small bilateral areas of peripheral GGO with minimal consolidation; D, female, 43 years old presenting with fever with cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows a right lung region of peripheral consolidation. Figure 2b: Examples of typical chest CT findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 74 years old with fever and cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows bilateral subpleural ground glass opacities (GGO). B, female, 55 years old, with fever and cough for 7 days. Axial chest CT shows extensive bilateral ground glass opacities and consolidation; C, male, 43 years old, presenting with fever and cough for 1 week. Axial chest CT shows small bilateral areas of peripheral GGO with minimal consolidation; D, female, 43 years old presenting with fever with cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows a right lung region of peripheral consolidation. Figure 2c: Examples of typical chest CT findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 74 years old with fever and cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows bilateral subpleural ground glass opacities (GGO). B, female, 55 years old, with fever and cough for 7 days. Axial chest CT shows extensive bilateral ground glass opacities and consolidation; C, male, 43 years old, presenting with fever and cough for 1 week. Axial chest CT shows small bilateral areas of peripheral GGO with minimal consolidation; D, female, 43 years old presenting with fever with cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows a right lung region of peripheral consolidation. Figure 2d: Examples of typical chest CT findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 74 years old with fever and cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows bilateral subpleural ground glass opacities (GGO). B, female, 55 years old, with fever and cough for 7 days. Axial chest CT shows extensive bilateral ground glass opacities and consolidation; C, male, 43 years old, presenting with fever and cough for 1 week. Axial chest CT shows small bilateral areas of peripheral GGO with minimal consolidation; D, female, 43 years old presenting with fever with cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows a right lung region of peripheral consolidation. Figure 3a: Examples of chest CT findings less commonly reported in COVID-19 infection (atypical) in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 36 years old with cough for 3 days. Axial chest CT shows a small focal and central ground glass opacity (GGO) in the right upper lobe; B, female, 40 years old. Axial chest CT shows small peripheral linear opacities bilaterally. C, male, 38 years old. Axial chest CT shows a GGO in the central left lower lobe; D, male, 31 years old with fever for 1 day. Axial chest CT shows a linear opacity in the left lower lateral mid lung. Figure 3b: Examples of chest CT findings less commonly reported in COVID-19 infection (atypical) in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 36 years old with cough for 3 days. Axial chest CT shows a small focal and central ground glass opacity (GGO) in the right upper lobe; B, female, 40 years old. Axial chest CT shows small peripheral linear opacities bilaterally. C, male, 38 years old. Axial chest CT shows a GGO in the central left lower lobe; D, male, 31 years old with fever for 1 day. Axial chest CT shows a linear opacity in the left lower lateral mid lung. Figure 3c: Examples of chest CT findings less commonly reported in COVID-19 infection (atypical) in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 36 years old with cough for 3 days. Axial chest CT shows a small focal and central ground glass opacity (GGO) in the right upper lobe; B, female, 40 years old. Axial chest CT shows small peripheral linear opacities bilaterally. C, male, 38 years old. Axial chest CT shows a GGO in the central left lower lobe; D, male, 31 years old with fever for 1 day. Axial chest CT shows a linear opacity in the left lower lateral mid lung. Figure 3d: Examples of chest CT findings less commonly reported in COVID-19 infection (atypical) in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 36 years old with cough for 3 days. Axial chest CT shows a small focal and central ground glass opacity (GGO) in the right upper lobe; B, female, 40 years old. Axial chest CT shows small peripheral linear opacities bilaterally. C, male, 38 years old. Axial chest CT shows a GGO in the central left lower lobe; D, male, 31 years old with fever for 1 day. Axial chest CT shows a linear opacity in the left lower lateral mid lung. Discussion In our series, the sensitivity of chest CT was greater than that of RT-PCR (98% vs 71%, respectively, p<.001). The reasons for the low efficiency of viral nucleic acid detection may include: 1) immature development of nucleic acid detection technology; 2) variation in detection rate from different manufacturers; 3) low patient viral load; or 4) improper clinical sampling. The reasons for the relatively lower RT-PCR detection rate in our sample compared to a prior report are unknown (3). Our results support the use of chest CT for screening for COVD-19 for patients with clinical and epidemiologic features compatible with COVID-19 infection particularly when RT-PCR testing is negative.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Microorganisms
                Microorganisms
                microorganisms
                Microorganisms
                MDPI
                2076-2607
                22 January 2021
                February 2021
                : 9
                : 2
                : 232
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Pharmacology and Toxicology Department, Maragheh University of Medical Sciences, Maragheh 5515878151, Iran; eftekharia@ 123456tbzmed.ac.ir
                [2 ]Dental and Periodontal Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz 5166615731, Iran; alipour.m@ 123456tbzmed.ac.ir (M.A.); maleki.s.89@ 123456gmail.com (S.M.D.); sharifi.simin7@ 123456gmail.com (S.S.)
                [3 ]Physiology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia 571478334, Iran; lchodari@ 123456yahoo.com
                [4 ]Kidney Research Center, Imam Reza Hospital, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz 5166615731, Iran; ardalanm34@ 123456gmail.com (M.A.); sepide.zununi@ 123456gmail.com (S.Z.V.)
                [5 ]Faculty of Dentistry, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz 5166615731, Iran; samiei.moh@ 123456gmail.com
                [6 ]Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnologies, Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences, 11 Izzat Nabiyev, Baku AZ 1073, Azerbaijan; i_guseinova@ 123456mail.ru
                [7 ]Department of Biophysics and Biochemistry, Baku State University, Baku AZ 1148, Azerbaijan; hrovshan@ 123456hotmail.com
                [8 ]Joint Ukraine-Azerbaijan International Research and Education Center of Nanobiotechnology and Functional Nanosystems, 82100 Drohobych, Ukraine
                [9 ]Center of Experimental Orthopaedics, Saarland University Medical Center, D-66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: ahmadian.elham@ 123456yahoo.com (E.A.); mmcucchiarini@ 123456hotmail.com (M.C.); Tel.: +98-914-445-4094 (E.A.); +49-6841-1624-987 (M.C.)
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9717-8213
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0179-4562
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7230-0489
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0323-8922
                Article
                microorganisms-09-00232
                10.3390/microorganisms9020232
                7911200
                33499379
                c2f6dc07-5167-4a52-8cbb-dd739731071c
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 21 December 2020
                : 16 January 2021
                Categories
                Review

                covid-19,coronavirus,detection,epidemic,nanotechnology
                covid-19, coronavirus, detection, epidemic, nanotechnology

                Comments

                Comment on this article