Comparison of the simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx–nasopharynx swab results in patients applying to the SARS‐CoV‐2 outpatient clinic for the first time
The aim is to comparatively evaluate the results of simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx–nasopharynx (ONP) swabs in patients who had presented to the outpatient department with a suspicion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). An ONP sample was obtained following bilate...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal of medical virology Vol. 93; no. 7; pp. 4516 - 4522 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
United States
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
01.07.2021
John Wiley and Sons Inc |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | The aim is to comparatively evaluate the results of simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx–nasopharynx (ONP) swabs in patients who had presented to the outpatient department with a suspicion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). An ONP sample was obtained following bilateral conjunctiva swabs in 85 subjects with a contact history or symptoms but unknown SARS‐CoV‐2 status and with no ocular symptoms or findings. The results were evaluated according to the patient's symptoms and how the swab was taken. The conjunctiva swab was positive in 29 (34.1%) cases and the ONP swab in 20 (23.5%) cases. Both methods produced positive results in 11 (14.1%) cases. The mean cycle threshold (Ct) value was 30.15 ± 3.41 in symptomatic cases and 33.62 ± 1.76 in asymptomatic cases (p = .008). The mean Ct value was 24.37 ± 3.48 when only the ONP swab was positive and 31.22 ± 1.99 when only the conjunctiva swab was positive. In cases that were positive by both methods, the mean Ct value was 25.21 ± 4.94 for the ONP swab and 30.29 ± 5.05 for the conjunctiva swab. We found higher SARS‐CoV‐2 detection rates with the conjunctiva swab than the ONP swab in cases with unknown SARS‐CoV‐2 status in the early period. In addition, the conjunctival viral load seemed to be higher in symptomatic cases than in asymptomatic cases. We, therefore, believe a conjunctiva swab could be an alternative method to detect SARS‐CoV‐2 at the time of the first presentation to the outpatient department. |
---|---|
AbstractList | The aim is to comparatively evaluate the results of simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx-nasopharynx (ONP) swabs in patients who had presented to the outpatient department with a suspicion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). An ONP sample was obtained following bilateral conjunctiva swabs in 85 subjects with a contact history or symptoms but unknown SARS-CoV-2 status and with no ocular symptoms or findings. The results were evaluated according to the patient's symptoms and how the swab was taken. The conjunctiva swab was positive in 29 (34.1%) cases and the ONP swab in 20 (23.5%) cases. Both methods produced positive results in 11 (14.1%) cases. The mean cycle threshold (C
) value was 30.15 ± 3.41 in symptomatic cases and 33.62 ± 1.76 in asymptomatic cases (p = .008). The mean C
value was 24.37 ± 3.48 when only the ONP swab was positive and 31.22 ± 1.99 when only the conjunctiva swab was positive. In cases that were positive by both methods, the mean C
value was 25.21 ± 4.94 for the ONP swab and 30.29 ± 5.05 for the conjunctiva swab. We found higher SARS-CoV-2 detection rates with the conjunctiva swab than the ONP swab in cases with unknown SARS-CoV-2 status in the early period. In addition, the conjunctival viral load seemed to be higher in symptomatic cases than in asymptomatic cases. We, therefore, believe a conjunctiva swab could be an alternative method to detect SARS-CoV-2 at the time of the first presentation to the outpatient department. The aim is to comparatively evaluate the results of simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx–nasopharynx (ONP) swabs in patients who had presented to the outpatient department with a suspicion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). An ONP sample was obtained following bilateral conjunctiva swabs in 85 subjects with a contact history or symptoms but unknown SARS‐CoV‐2 status and with no ocular symptoms or findings. The results were evaluated according to the patient's symptoms and how the swab was taken. The conjunctiva swab was positive in 29 (34.1%) cases and the ONP swab in 20 (23.5%) cases. Both methods produced positive results in 11 (14.1%) cases. The mean cycle threshold (Ct) value was 30.15 ± 3.41 in symptomatic cases and 33.62 ± 1.76 in asymptomatic cases (p = .008). The mean Ct value was 24.37 ± 3.48 when only the ONP swab was positive and 31.22 ± 1.99 when only the conjunctiva swab was positive. In cases that were positive by both methods, the mean Ct value was 25.21 ± 4.94 for the ONP swab and 30.29 ± 5.05 for the conjunctiva swab. We found higher SARS‐CoV‐2 detection rates with the conjunctiva swab than the ONP swab in cases with unknown SARS‐CoV‐2 status in the early period. In addition, the conjunctival viral load seemed to be higher in symptomatic cases than in asymptomatic cases. We, therefore, believe a conjunctiva swab could be an alternative method to detect SARS‐CoV‐2 at the time of the first presentation to the outpatient department. The aim is to comparatively evaluate the results of simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx-nasopharynx (ONP) swabs in patients who had presented to the outpatient department with a suspicion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). An ONP sample was obtained following bilateral conjunctiva swabs in 85 subjects with a contact history or symptoms but unknown SARS-CoV-2 status and with no ocular symptoms or findings. The results were evaluated according to the patient's symptoms and how the swab was taken. The conjunctiva swab was positive in 29 (34.1%) cases and the ONP swab in 20 (23.5%) cases. Both methods produced positive results in 11 (14.1%) cases. The mean cycle threshold (Ct ) value was 30.15 ± 3.41 in symptomatic cases and 33.62 ± 1.76 in asymptomatic cases (p = .008). The mean Ct value was 24.37 ± 3.48 when only the ONP swab was positive and 31.22 ± 1.99 when only the conjunctiva swab was positive. In cases that were positive by both methods, the mean Ct value was 25.21 ± 4.94 for the ONP swab and 30.29 ± 5.05 for the conjunctiva swab. We found higher SARS-CoV-2 detection rates with the conjunctiva swab than the ONP swab in cases with unknown SARS-CoV-2 status in the early period. In addition, the conjunctival viral load seemed to be higher in symptomatic cases than in asymptomatic cases. We, therefore, believe a conjunctiva swab could be an alternative method to detect SARS-CoV-2 at the time of the first presentation to the outpatient department.The aim is to comparatively evaluate the results of simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx-nasopharynx (ONP) swabs in patients who had presented to the outpatient department with a suspicion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). An ONP sample was obtained following bilateral conjunctiva swabs in 85 subjects with a contact history or symptoms but unknown SARS-CoV-2 status and with no ocular symptoms or findings. The results were evaluated according to the patient's symptoms and how the swab was taken. The conjunctiva swab was positive in 29 (34.1%) cases and the ONP swab in 20 (23.5%) cases. Both methods produced positive results in 11 (14.1%) cases. The mean cycle threshold (Ct ) value was 30.15 ± 3.41 in symptomatic cases and 33.62 ± 1.76 in asymptomatic cases (p = .008). The mean Ct value was 24.37 ± 3.48 when only the ONP swab was positive and 31.22 ± 1.99 when only the conjunctiva swab was positive. In cases that were positive by both methods, the mean Ct value was 25.21 ± 4.94 for the ONP swab and 30.29 ± 5.05 for the conjunctiva swab. We found higher SARS-CoV-2 detection rates with the conjunctiva swab than the ONP swab in cases with unknown SARS-CoV-2 status in the early period. In addition, the conjunctival viral load seemed to be higher in symptomatic cases than in asymptomatic cases. We, therefore, believe a conjunctiva swab could be an alternative method to detect SARS-CoV-2 at the time of the first presentation to the outpatient department. The aim is to comparatively evaluate the results of simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx–nasopharynx (ONP) swabs in patients who had presented to the outpatient department with a suspicion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). An ONP sample was obtained following bilateral conjunctiva swabs in 85 subjects with a contact history or symptoms but unknown SARS‐CoV‐2 status and with no ocular symptoms or findings. The results were evaluated according to the patient's symptoms and how the swab was taken. The conjunctiva swab was positive in 29 (34.1%) cases and the ONP swab in 20 (23.5%) cases. Both methods produced positive results in 11 (14.1%) cases. The mean cycle threshold ( C t ) value was 30.15 ± 3.41 in symptomatic cases and 33.62 ± 1.76 in asymptomatic cases ( p = .008). The mean C t value was 24.37 ± 3.48 when only the ONP swab was positive and 31.22 ± 1.99 when only the conjunctiva swab was positive. In cases that were positive by both methods, the mean C t value was 25.21 ± 4.94 for the ONP swab and 30.29 ± 5.05 for the conjunctiva swab. We found higher SARS‐CoV‐2 detection rates with the conjunctiva swab than the ONP swab in cases with unknown SARS‐CoV‐2 status in the early period. In addition, the conjunctival viral load seemed to be higher in symptomatic cases than in asymptomatic cases. We, therefore, believe a conjunctiva swab could be an alternative method to detect SARS‐CoV‐2 at the time of the first presentation to the outpatient department. The aim is to comparatively evaluate the results of simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx–nasopharynx (ONP) swabs in patients who had presented to the outpatient department with a suspicion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). An ONP sample was obtained following bilateral conjunctiva swabs in 85 subjects with a contact history or symptoms but unknown SARS‐CoV‐2 status and with no ocular symptoms or findings. The results were evaluated according to the patient's symptoms and how the swab was taken. The conjunctiva swab was positive in 29 (34.1%) cases and the ONP swab in 20 (23.5%) cases. Both methods produced positive results in 11 (14.1%) cases. The mean cycle threshold (Ct) value was 30.15 ± 3.41 in symptomatic cases and 33.62 ± 1.76 in asymptomatic cases (p = .008). The mean Ct value was 24.37 ± 3.48 when only the ONP swab was positive and 31.22 ± 1.99 when only the conjunctiva swab was positive. In cases that were positive by both methods, the mean Ct value was 25.21 ± 4.94 for the ONP swab and 30.29 ± 5.05 for the conjunctiva swab. We found higher SARS‐CoV‐2 detection rates with the conjunctiva swab than the ONP swab in cases with unknown SARS‐CoV‐2 status in the early period. In addition, the conjunctival viral load seemed to be higher in symptomatic cases than in asymptomatic cases. We, therefore, believe a conjunctiva swab could be an alternative method to detect SARS‐CoV‐2 at the time of the first presentation to the outpatient department. |
Author | Gunduz, Ayten Turkoglu, Gamze Firat, Murat |
AuthorAffiliation | 2 Department of Ophthalmology Elbistan State Hospital Elbistan Turkey 1 Department of Medical Microbology, Faculty of Medicine Malatya Turgut Ozal University Malatya Turkey 3 Department of Medical Microbology Malatya Training and Research Hospital Malatya Turkey |
AuthorAffiliation_xml | – name: 3 Department of Medical Microbology Malatya Training and Research Hospital Malatya Turkey – name: 1 Department of Medical Microbology, Faculty of Medicine Malatya Turgut Ozal University Malatya Turkey – name: 2 Department of Ophthalmology Elbistan State Hospital Elbistan Turkey |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Ayten orcidid: 0000-0003-2031-9978 surname: Gunduz fullname: Gunduz, Ayten email: aytengunduz@hotmail.com organization: Malatya Turgut Ozal University – sequence: 2 givenname: Murat orcidid: 0000-0001-6040-9332 surname: Firat fullname: Firat, Murat organization: Elbistan State Hospital – sequence: 3 givenname: Gamze surname: Turkoglu fullname: Turkoglu, Gamze organization: Malatya Training and Research Hospital |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33783859$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNp1ks1u1DAUhS1URKeFBS-ALLGhi7R2Mo7tDVI1ggIqQqLQreU4dsejxE5tZ8rs-ghIvAJP1ifBnR8EFWz8I3_n6NzrewD2nHcagOcYHWOEypNFvzwua87wIzDBiNcFRxTvgQnC07qoa0z2wUGMC4QQ42X5BOxXFWUVI3wCfs58P8hgo3fQG5jmGkbbj12STvsxQuXdYnQq2aWE0rXQBz_MZVi5b3e3P5yMuxuMN7KBQccsjdA6OMhktctnOQzdyrormPza_uL088Xd7feZv8xrCf2YtihUnXVWQePDGjQ2xAST7fVT8NjILupn2_0QfH375svsXXH-6ez97PS8UFOKcWFUzRqNSduwppKlMUwTrpDiZaUorYhqcc2NlC3DEivacKxYS1WpFTFE8bo6BK83vsPY9LpVOVSQnRiC7XORwksr_n5xdi6u_FKwkiCOq2zwamsQ_PWoYxK9jUp33aabImMUTwnFPKMvH6ALPwaXy8tUhQkhnKJMvfgz0e8ouw_MwMkGUMHHGLQRyqbcT38f0HYCI3E_IiKPiFiPSFYcPVDsTP_Fbt1vbKdX_wfFh4-XG8UvZ3rTeg |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_3390_diagnostics13061114 crossref_primary_10_3390_vision6030046 crossref_primary_10_1038_s41598_021_98873_1 crossref_primary_10_4103_ojo_ojo_237_22 crossref_primary_10_1080_09273948_2021_1927118 crossref_primary_10_1080_09273948_2023_2272200 |
Cites_doi | 10.3855/jidc.13224 10.1177/1120672120976548 10.1056/NEJMc2001737 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1287_20 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.03.026 10.1016/j.medmal.2020.04.006 10.1016/j.jcjo.2020.03.003 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.04.028 10.1016/j.idcr.2020.e00791 10.1080/09273948.2020.1775261 10.1111/aos.14412 10.1080/09273948.2020.1772314 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.08.029 10.1056/NEJMc2004973 10.1007/s00405-020-06402-z 10.5811/westjem.2020.8.48420 10.1002/jmv.25892 10.1136/bjo.2003.035931 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30313-5 10.2147/OPTH.S270006 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC. |
Copyright_xml | – notice: 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC – notice: 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC. |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION NPM 7QL 7TK 7U9 8FD C1K FR3 H94 K9. M7N P64 RC3 7X8 5PM |
DOI | 10.1002/jmv.26981 |
DatabaseName | CrossRef PubMed Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B) Neurosciences Abstracts Virology and AIDS Abstracts Technology Research Database Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management Engineering Research Database AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C) Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts Genetics Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef PubMed Genetics Abstracts Virology and AIDS Abstracts Technology Research Database Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B) Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C) AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Engineering Research Database Neurosciences Abstracts Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | PubMed MEDLINE - Academic Genetics Abstracts |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
DocumentTitleAlternate | GUNDUZ et al |
EISSN | 1096-9071 |
EndPage | 4522 |
ExternalDocumentID | PMC8250913 33783859 10_1002_jmv_26981 JMV26981 |
Genre | article Journal Article |
GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: Biyoeksen Ar‐Ge Tekn. Ltd. funderid: their RT‐PCR kits donated for our use utilized – fundername: Biyoeksen Ar-Ge Tekn. Ltd. grantid: their RT-PCR kits donated for our use utilized – fundername: Biyoeksen Ar‐Ge Tekn. Ltd. grantid: their RT‐PCR kits donated for our use utilized |
GroupedDBID | --- .3N .55 .GA .GJ .Y3 05W 0R~ 10A 1L6 1OB 1OC 1ZS 31~ 33P 3O- 3SF 3WU 4.4 50Y 50Z 51W 51X 52M 52N 52O 52P 52R 52S 52T 52U 52V 52W 52X 53G 5GY 5RE 5VS 66C 702 7PT 8-0 8-1 8-3 8-4 8-5 8UM 930 A01 A03 AAESR AAEVG AAHQN AAIPD AAMMB AAMNL AANHP AANLZ AAONW AASGY AAXRX AAYCA AAZKR ABCQN ABCUV ABEML ABIJN ABJNI ABOCM ABPVW ABQWH ABXGK ACAHQ ACBWZ ACCZN ACGFS ACGOF ACMXC ACPOU ACPRK ACRPL ACSCC ACXBN ACXQS ACYXJ ADBBV ADBTR ADEOM ADIZJ ADKYN ADMGS ADNMO ADOZA ADXAS ADZMN AEFGJ AEIGN AEIMD AENEX AEUYR AEYWJ AFBPY AFFNX AFFPM AFGKR AFRAH AFWVQ AFZJQ AGHNM AGQPQ AGXDD AGYGG AHBTC AHMBA AI. AIACR AIDQK AIDYY AITYG AIURR ALAGY ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN ALVPJ AMBMR AMYDB ASPBG ATUGU AVWKF AZBYB AZFZN AZVAB BAFTC BDRZF BFHJK BHBCM BMXJE BROTX BRXPI BY8 C45 CS3 D-6 D-7 D-E D-F DCZOG DPXWK DR2 DRFUL DRMAN DRSTM DU5 EBD EBS ECGQY EJD ELTNK EMOBN F00 F01 F04 F5P FEDTE FUBAC G-S G.N GNP GODZA H.X HBH HF~ HGLYW HHY HHZ HVGLF HZ~ IX1 J0M JPC KBYEO KQQ L7B LATKE LAW LC2 LC3 LEEKS LH4 LITHE LOXES LP6 LP7 LUTES LW6 LYRES M65 MEWTI MK4 MRFUL MRMAN MRSTM MSFUL MSMAN MSSTM MXFUL MXMAN MXSTM N04 N05 N9A NF~ NNB O66 O9- OIG OVD P2P P2W P2X P2Z P4B P4D PALCI PQQKQ Q.N Q11 QB0 QRW R.K RIWAO RJQFR ROL RX1 RYL SAMSI SUPJJ SV3 TEORI TUS UB1 V2E VH1 W8V W99 WBKPD WHG WIB WIH WIJ WIK WJL WNSPC WOHZO WQJ WXI WXSBR WYISQ X7M XG1 XPP XV2 ZGI ZXP ZZTAW ~IA ~KM ~WT AAHHS AAYXX ACCFJ AEEZP AEQDE AIWBW AJBDE CITATION AEUQT AFPWT NPM RGB RWI WRC WUP 7QL 7TK 7U9 8FD C1K FR3 H94 K9. M7N P64 RC3 7X8 5PM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c4711-fc68be15db8b3a2ff8e59c0c923c7735cd169faad81a1c7b91c8d7c2ec5f5c963 |
IEDL.DBID | DR2 |
ISSN | 0146-6615 1096-9071 |
IngestDate | Thu Aug 21 14:13:35 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 11 08:34:27 EDT 2025 Sat Jul 26 02:18:08 EDT 2025 Wed Feb 19 02:28:48 EST 2025 Thu Apr 24 22:54:13 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 02:24:49 EDT 2025 Wed Aug 20 07:25:59 EDT 2025 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 7 |
Keywords | COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 conjunctival swab tears nasopharyngeal swab oropharyngeal swab |
Language | English |
License | 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC. This article is being made freely available through PubMed Central as part of the COVID-19 public health emergency response. It can be used for unrestricted research re-use and analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source, for the duration of the public health emergency. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c4711-fc68be15db8b3a2ff8e59c0c923c7735cd169faad81a1c7b91c8d7c2ec5f5c963 |
Notes | 1st and 3rd places are affiliated hospitals. Note ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 ObjectType-Article-2 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3 Note: 1st and 3rd places are affiliated hospitals. |
ORCID | 0000-0001-6040-9332 0000-0003-2031-9978 |
OpenAccessLink | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC8250913 |
PMID | 33783859 |
PQID | 2531555970 |
PQPubID | 105515 |
PageCount | 7 |
ParticipantIDs | pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8250913 proquest_miscellaneous_2507145719 proquest_journals_2531555970 pubmed_primary_33783859 crossref_citationtrail_10_1002_jmv_26981 crossref_primary_10_1002_jmv_26981 wiley_primary_10_1002_jmv_26981_JMV26981 |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | July 2021 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2021-07-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 07 year: 2021 text: July 2021 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | United States |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States – name: London – name: Hoboken |
PublicationTitle | Journal of medical virology |
PublicationTitleAlternate | J Med Virol |
PublicationYear | 2021 |
Publisher | Wiley Subscription Services, Inc John Wiley and Sons Inc |
Publisher_xml | – name: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc – name: John Wiley and Sons Inc |
References | 2004; 88 2020; 20 2020; 382 2020; 395 2020 2020; 50 2021; 128 2020; 92 2020; 28 2020; 127 2020; 14 2020; 118 2020; 68 2020; 55 2020; 323 2020; 43 2020; 98 2020; 21 e_1_2_8_18_1 e_1_2_8_19_1 e_1_2_8_13_1 e_1_2_8_24_1 e_1_2_8_14_1 e_1_2_8_15_1 e_1_2_8_16_1 Bernabei F (e_1_2_8_7_1) 2020; 43 Lange C (e_1_2_8_9_1) 2020; 118 e_1_2_8_3_1 e_1_2_8_2_1 e_1_2_8_5_1 e_1_2_8_4_1 e_1_2_8_6_1 e_1_2_8_8_1 Wang W (e_1_2_8_17_1) 2020; 323 e_1_2_8_20_1 e_1_2_8_10_1 e_1_2_8_21_1 e_1_2_8_11_1 e_1_2_8_22_1 e_1_2_8_12_1 e_1_2_8_23_1 |
References_xml | – volume: 28 start-page: 735 issue: 5 year: 2020 end-page: 738 article-title: Ocular surface expression of SARS‐CoV‐2 receptors publication-title: Ocul Immunol Inflamm – volume: 395 issue: 10224 year: 2020 article-title: 2019‐nCoV transmission through the ocular surface must not be ignored publication-title: Lancet – volume: 43 start-page: 149 issue: 4 year: 2020 end-page: 155 article-title: There is a role in detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 in conjunctiva and tears: a comprehensive review publication-title: New Microbiol – volume: 14 start-page: 2701 year: 2020 end-page: 2708 article-title: Assessment of coronavirus in the conjunctival tears and secretions in patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in Sohag Province, Egypt publication-title: Clin Ophthalmol – volume: 55 start-page: e125 issue: 4 year: 2020 end-page: e129 article-title: Keratoconjunctivitis as the initial medical presentation of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) publication-title: Can J Ophthalmol – volume: 88 start-page: 861 issue: 7 year: 2004 end-page: 863 article-title: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus in tears publication-title: Br J Ophthalmol – volume: 127 start-page: 982 issue: 7 year: 2020 end-page: 983 article-title: Ocular findings and proportion with conjunctival SARS‐COV‐2 in COVID‐19 patients publication-title: Ophthalmology – volume: 28 start-page: 745 issue: 5 year: 2020 end-page: 748 article-title: Evaluation of conjunctival swab PCR results in patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection publication-title: Ocul Immunol Inflamm – volume: 127 start-page: 977 issue: 7 year: 2020 end-page: 979 article-title: Assessing viral shedding and infectivity of tears in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) patients publication-title: Ophthalmology – volume: 382 start-page: 1177 issue: 12 year: 2020 end-page: 1179 article-title: SARS‐CoV‐2 viral load in upper respiratory specimens of infected patients publication-title: N Engl J Med – volume: 118 start-page: 1 year: 2020 end-page: 4 article-title: What is the significance of the conjunctiva as a potential transmission route for SARS‐CoV‐2 infections? publication-title: Der Ophthalmologe – year: 2020 article-title: Evidence‐based of conjunctival COVID‐19 positivity: an Italian experience: Gemelli against COVID Group publication-title: Eur J Ophthalmol – volume: 50 start-page: 436 issue: 5 year: 2020 end-page: 439 article-title: Features of anosmia in COVID‐19 publication-title: Med Mal Infect – volume: 128 start-page: 494 issue: 4 year: 2021 end-page: 503 article-title: Evaluation of SARS‐CoV‐2 in tears of patients with moderate to severe COVID‐19 publication-title: Ophthalmology – volume: 92 start-page: 1383 issue: 9 year: 2020 end-page: 1385 article-title: COVID‐19: recommended sampling sites at different stages of the disease publication-title: J Med Virol – volume: 21 start-page: 1 issue: 6 year: 2020 end-page: 4 article-title: Practical diagnostic accuracy of nasopharyngeal swab testing for novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) publication-title: Western J Emergency Med – volume: 382 start-page: 1564 issue: 16 year: 2020 end-page: 1567 article-title: Aerosol and surface stability of SARS‐CoV‐2 as compared with SARS‐CoV‐1 publication-title: N Engl J Med – volume: 98 issue: 3 year: 2020 article-title: The possibility of COVID‐19 transmission from eye to nose publication-title: Acta Ophthalmol – volume: 68 start-page: 1015 issue: 6 year: 2020 end-page: 1017 article-title: Presence of viral RNA of SARS‐CoV‐2 in conjunctival swab specimens of COVID‐19 patients publication-title: Indian J Ophthalmol – volume: 14 start-page: 977 issue: 9 year: 2020 end-page: 981 article-title: Detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 in the tears and conjunctival secretions of coronavirus disease 2019 patients publication-title: J Infect Dev Countries – start-page: 1 year: 2020 end-page: 5 article-title: Topical lignocaine anaesthesia for oropharyngeal sampling for COVID‐19 publication-title: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol – volume: 323 start-page: 1843 issue: 18 year: 2020 end-page: 1844 article-title: Detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 in different types of clinical specimens publication-title: JAMA – volume: 20 year: 2020 article-title: A cautionary tale of false‐negative nasopharyngeal COVID‐19 testing publication-title: IDCases – ident: e_1_2_8_5_1 doi: 10.3855/jidc.13224 – ident: e_1_2_8_23_1 doi: 10.1177/1120672120976548 – ident: e_1_2_8_16_1 doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2001737 – ident: e_1_2_8_12_1 doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1287_20 – ident: e_1_2_8_8_1 doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.03.026 – ident: e_1_2_8_24_1 doi: 10.1016/j.medmal.2020.04.006 – ident: e_1_2_8_11_1 doi: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2020.03.003 – ident: e_1_2_8_6_1 doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.04.028 – ident: e_1_2_8_18_1 doi: 10.1016/j.idcr.2020.e00791 – ident: e_1_2_8_4_1 doi: 10.1080/09273948.2020.1775261 – ident: e_1_2_8_10_1 doi: 10.1111/aos.14412 – ident: e_1_2_8_2_1 doi: 10.1080/09273948.2020.1772314 – volume: 43 start-page: 149 issue: 4 year: 2020 ident: e_1_2_8_7_1 article-title: There is a role in detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 in conjunctiva and tears: a comprehensive review publication-title: New Microbiol – ident: e_1_2_8_15_1 doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.08.029 – ident: e_1_2_8_22_1 doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2004973 – ident: e_1_2_8_21_1 doi: 10.1007/s00405-020-06402-z – ident: e_1_2_8_19_1 doi: 10.5811/westjem.2020.8.48420 – ident: e_1_2_8_20_1 doi: 10.1002/jmv.25892 – ident: e_1_2_8_14_1 doi: 10.1136/bjo.2003.035931 – ident: e_1_2_8_3_1 doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30313-5 – volume: 118 start-page: 1 year: 2020 ident: e_1_2_8_9_1 article-title: What is the significance of the conjunctiva as a potential transmission route for SARS‐CoV‐2 infections? publication-title: Der Ophthalmologe – ident: e_1_2_8_13_1 doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S270006 – volume: 323 start-page: 1843 issue: 18 year: 2020 ident: e_1_2_8_17_1 article-title: Detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 in different types of clinical specimens publication-title: JAMA |
SSID | ssj0008922 |
Score | 2.3567042 |
Snippet | The aim is to comparatively evaluate the results of simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx–nasopharynx (ONP) swabs in patients who had presented to the... The aim is to comparatively evaluate the results of simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx-nasopharynx (ONP) swabs in patients who had presented to the... |
SourceID | pubmedcentral proquest pubmed crossref wiley |
SourceType | Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
StartPage | 4516 |
SubjectTerms | Asymptomatic Conjunctiva conjunctival swab Coronaviruses COVID‐19 nasopharyngeal swab Nasopharynx oropharyngeal swab Oropharynx SARS‐CoV‐2 Severe acute respiratory syndrome Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 tears Viral diseases Virology |
Title | Comparison of the simultaneous conjunctiva and oropharynx–nasopharynx swab results in patients applying to the SARS‐CoV‐2 outpatient clinic for the first time |
URI | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002%2Fjmv.26981 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33783859 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2531555970 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2507145719 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC8250913 |
Volume | 93 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3NbtQwELaqHiouQPldKMggDlyyXTvr2BGnakVVVSqHllY9IEW2Y6tpqVM1Wah66iMg8Qo8WZ-EsZ2kLAUJcVntypONk8zPN_HMZ4TeMJpZ8Iw2kdxCgpIyAjYnbZJRpUmuFZ-Wge3zQ7a1P90-ZIdL6F3fCxP5IYYXbt4ygr_2Bi5Vs35DGnp8-mVMszy0XftaLQ-Idm-oo0QeVxDAEyQQg1jPKjSh68ORi7HoFsC8XSf5K34NAWjzHvrUTz3WnZyM560a68vfWB3_89ruo7sdMMUbUZNW0ZJxD9DKTrf0_hD9mA07FuLaYsCNuKl8OaJ0pp43GPLqY4iRfrc0LF2J6_P67Ahm4C6ur7472fS_cPNVKgxJPhza4Mrhjtm1wX4t3Tdd4bYOf7-3sbt3ffVtVh_AJ8X1vO1EcWznxIC3g6CtAMLitjo1j9D-5vuPs62k2-Ih0RAVSWJ1JpQhrFRCpZJaKwzL9UQD7NScp0yXJMutlKUgkmiucqJFyTU1mlmmwXk8RsuuduYpwlxMuFRWyLxMp1z6jmHFS0MtA9AFnmqE3vYPu9Ad_7nfhuNzEZmbaQF3vQh3fYReD6JnkfTjT0JrvcYUnd03BQWXxnySBqd7NQyDxfplmPg8QMY3jTFO8hF6EhVsOEuacpEKBiN8QfUGAc8GvjjiqqPACg6pvud4hcsMmvX3iRfbOwfhy7N_F32O7lBfzBPqlNfQcns-Ny8AjbXqZTC7n0S4OYM |
linkProvider | Wiley-Blackwell |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1Lb9QwELaqIgEX3o-FAgZx4JLt2lnHjsSlWlEtpdtDX-oFRbZjqynUqZosIE79CUj8BX5Zfwlj51GWgoS4RIk8SZxknvHMNwi9ZDSxoBltJLmFACVmBGRO2iihSpNUKz7OA9rnVjLdG28csIMl9LqrhWnwIfofbl4ygr72Au5_SK9eoIYeHX8a0iT1dddXfEfvEFBtX4BHibRZQwBdEIEVYh2u0Iiu9qcuWqNLLublTMlfPdhggtZvovfd5JvMkw_Dea2G-utvuI7_-3S30I3WN8VrDTPdRkvG3UFXZ-3q-130Y9I3LcSlxeA64qrwGYnSmXJeYQitj8BM-oZpWLocl6flySFMwX05P_vuZNUd4eqzVBjifDi1woXDLbhrhf1yuq-7wnUZLr-ztr1zfvZtUu7DluJyXrekuKnoxOByB0JbgBeL6-LY3EN76292J9Oo7fIQaTCMJLI6EcoQliuhYkmtFYaleqTB89Scx0znJEmtlLkgkmiuUqJFzjU1mlmmQX_cR8uudOYhwlyMuFRWyDSPx1z6omHFc0MtA78LlNUAveq-dqZbCHTfieNj1oA30wzeehbe-gC96ElPGtyPPxGtdCyTtaJfZRS0GvNxGtzueT8MQutXYprvATS-boxxkg7Qg4bD-rvEMRexYDDCF3ivJ_CA4IsjrjgMwOAQ7XuYV3jMwFp_n3i2MdsPO4_-nfQZujbdnW1mm2-33j1G16nP7QlpyytouT6dmyfgnNXqaZDBn5U6PZ4 |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3NbtQwELaqIlVcoPx22wIGceCS7cZZx444VVtWpdAKtbTqASmyHVtNaZ1Vk6UVpz4CEq_Ak_VJGDs_ZSlIiMtqV55snGR-volnPiP0kpLYgGc0gWAGEpSIhmBzwgQxkSpMlGTDzLN97sSb-8OtQ3o4h163vTA1P0T3ws1ZhvfXzsAnmVm7Jg09Pv3SJ3Hi2q5vDeMBdyq9sXvNHcWTegkBXEEAQYi2tEIDstYdOhuMbiDMm4WSvwJYH4HGd9Gndu514cnn_rSSffX1N1rH_7y4RXSnQaZ4vVale2hO2_toYbtZe3-Afoy6LQtxYTAAR1zmrh5RWF1MSwyJ9TEESbddGhY2w8VZMTmCGdiLq8vvVpTtL1yeC4khy4dDS5xb3FC7ltgtpruuK1wV_u_31nf3ri6_jYoD-CS4mFaNKK77OTEAbi9ocsCwuMpP9UO0P37zcbQZNHs8BArCYhgYFXOpQ5pJLiNBjOGaJmqgAHcqxiKqsjBOjBAZD0WomExCxTOmiFbUUAXe4xGat4XVSwgzPmBCGi6SLBoy4VqGJcs0MRRQF7iqHnrVPuxUNQTobh-Ok7SmbiYp3PXU3_UeetGJTmrWjz8JrbYakzaGX6YEfBp1WRqc7nk3DCbr1mHq5wEyrmuMsjDpoce1gnVniSLGI05hhM2oXifg6MBnR2x-5GnBIdd3JK9wmV6z_j7xdGv7wH9Z_nfRZ2jhw8Y4ff92590Kuk1cYY-vWV5F89XZVD8BZFbJp94CfwLpcTxW |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison+of+the+simultaneous+conjunctiva+and+oropharynx%E2%80%93nasopharynx+swab+results+in+patients+applying+to+the+SARS%E2%80%90CoV%E2%80%902+outpatient+clinic+for+the+first+time&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+medical+virology&rft.au=Gunduz%2C+Ayten&rft.au=Firat%2C+Murat&rft.au=Turkoglu%2C+Gamze&rft.date=2021-07-01&rft.pub=John+Wiley+and+Sons+Inc&rft.issn=0146-6615&rft.eissn=1096-9071&rft.volume=93&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=4516&rft.epage=4522&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002%2Fjmv.26981&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F33783859&rft.externalDocID=PMC8250913 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0146-6615&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0146-6615&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0146-6615&client=summon |