Utilizing Moist or Dry Swabs for the Sampling of Nasal MRSA Carriers? An In Vivo and In Vitro Study.
ABSTRACT: This study investigates the quantitative bacterial recovery of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in nasal screenings by utilizing dry or moistened swabs within an in vivo and an in vitro experimental setting. 135 nasal MRSA carriers were each swabbed in one nostril with a dry and in the other one with a moistened rayon swab. Quantitative bacterial recovery was measured by standard viable count techniques. Furthermore, an anatomically correct artificial nose model was inoculated with a numerically defined suspension of MRSA and swabbed with dry and moistened rayon, polyurethane-foam and nylon-flocked swabs to test these different settings and swab-materials under identical laboratory conditions. In vivo, quantities of MRSA per nostril in carriers varied between <101 and >107 colony forming units, with a median of 2.15x104 CFU. However, no statistically significant differences could be detected for the recovery of MRSA quantities when swabbing nasal carriers with moist or dry rayon swabs. In vitro testing confirmed the in vivo data for swabs with rayon, polyurethane and nylon-flocked tips, since pre-moistening of swabs did not significantly affect the quantities of retrieved bacteria. Therefore, pre-moistening of swabs prior to nasal MRSA sampling provides no advantage in terms of recovering greater bacterial quantities and therefore can be omitted. In addition, this situation can be mimicked in an in vitro model, thereby providing a useful basis for future in vitro testings of new swab types or target organisms for screening approaches.
Project description:OBJECTIVES: Swab-based nasal screening is commonly used to identify asymptomatic carriage of Staphylococcus aureus in patients. Bacterial detection depends on the uptake and release capacities of the swabs and on the swabbing technique itself. This study investigates the performance of different swab-types in nasal MRSA-screening by utilizing a unique artificial nose model to provide realistic and standardized screening conditions. METHODS: An anatomically correct artificial nose model was inoculated with a numerically defined mixture of MRSA and Staphylococcus epidermidis bacteria at quantities of 4×10(2) and 8×10(2) colony forming units (CFU), respectively. Five swab-types were tested following a strict protocol. Bacterial recovery was measured for direct plating and after elution into Amies medium by standard viable count techniques. RESULTS: Mean recovered bacteria quantities varied between 209 and 0 CFU for MRSA, and 365 and 0 CFU for S. epidermidis, resulting swab-type-dependent MRSA-screening-sensitivities ranged between 0 and 100%. Swabs with nylon flocked tips or cellular foam tips performed significantly better compared to conventional rayon swabs referring to the recovered bacterial yield (p<0.001). Best results were obtained by using a flocked swab in combination with Amies preservation medium. Within the range of the utilized bacterial concentrations, recovery ratios for the particular swab-types were independent of the bacterial species. CONCLUSIONS: This study combines a realistic model of a human nose with standardized laboratory conditions to analyze swab-performance in MRSA-screening situations. Therefore, influences by inter-individual anatomical differences as well as diverse colonization densities in patients could be excluded. Recovery rates vary significantly between different swab-types. The choice of the swab has a great impact on the laboratory result. In fact, the swab-type contributes significantly to true positive or false negative detection of nasal MRSA carriage. These findings should be considered when screening a patient.
Project description:BACKGROUND:The global pandemic of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Related Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) has resulted in unprecedented challenges for healthcare systems. One barrier to widespread testing has been a paucity of traditional respiratory viral swab collection kits relative to the demand. Whether other sample collection kits, such as widely available MRSA nasal swabs can be used to detect SARS-CoV-2 is unknown. METHODS:We compared simultaneous nasal MRSA swabs (COPAN ESwabs ® 480C flocked nasal swab in 1mL of liquid Amies medium) and virals wabs (BD H192(07) flexible mini-tip flocked nasopharyngeal swabs in 3mL Universal Transport Medium) for SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing using Simplexa COVID-19 Direct assay on patients over a 4-day period. When the results were discordant, the viral swab sample was run again on the Cepheid Xpert Xpress ® SARS-CoV-2 assay. RESULTS:Of the 81 included samples, there were 19 positives and 62 negatives in viral media and 18 positives and 63 negative in the MRSA swabs. Amongst all included samples, there was concordance between the COPAN ESwabs ® 480C and the viral swabs in 78 (96.3%). CONCLUSION:We found a high rate of concordance in test results between COPAN ESwabs ® 480C in Amies solution and BD H192(07) nasopharyngeal swabs in in 3 mL of Universal Viral Transport medium viral media. Clinicians and laboratories should feel better informed and assured using COPAN ESwabs ® 480C to help in the diagnosis of COVID-19.
Project description:Screening recommendations for multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria comprise microbiological analyses from rectal swabs. However, essential specifications of the preanalytic steps of such screenings, i.e. the sampling technique, sampling devices and sampling site, are lacking. For standardized and optimum screening conditions these parameters are indispensable. Here, the optimum parameters were examined irrespective of the antibiotic resistance patterns of the target bacteria in order to establish a general basis for this type of screening. Swabs with rayon, polyurethane-cellular-foam and nylon-flocked tips were tested. Different sampling locations were evaluated, i.e. perianal, intraanal and deep intraanal. Subjects were swabbed and quantities of E. coli, K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii were assessed. Overall prevalences of E. coli, K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa, and A. baumannii were 94%, 16%, 12%, and 2%, respectively. Bacterial recovery rates were independent from the sampling-timepoint during hospital stay. Polyurethane-cellular-foam or nylon-flocked swabs recovered significantly more bacteria as compared to rayon swabs. Intraanal swabbing resulted in significantly higher bacterial quantities as compared to perianal swabbing. In contrast, for the detection of A. baumannii, perianal swabbing seems more suitable than intraanal swabbing. Gender-related differences in bacterial recovery could be detected from perianal but not from intraanal swabs.
Project description:The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic demonstrates the need for accurate and convenient approaches to diagnose and therapeutically monitor respiratory viral infections. We demonstrated that self-sampling with foam swabs at home is well-tolerated and provides quantitative viral output concordant with flocked swabs. Nasal cytokine levels correlate and cluster according to immune cell of origin. Periods of stable viral loads are followed by rapid elimination, which could be coupled with cytokine expansion and contraction using mathematical models. Nasal foam swab self-sampling at home provides a precise, mechanistic readout of respiratory virus shedding and local immune responses.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To design and evaluate 3D-printed nasal swabs for collection of samples for SARS-CoV-2 testing. DESIGN:An iterative design process was employed. Laboratory evaluation included in vitro assessment of mock nasopharyngeal samples spiked with two different concentrations of gamma-irradiated SARS-CoV-2. A prospective clinical study compared SARS-CoV-2 and human cellular material recovery by 3D-printed swabs and standard nasopharyngeal swabs. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS:Royal Melbourne Hospital, May 2020. Participants in the clinical evaluation were 50 hospital staff members attending a COVID-19 screening clinic and two inpatients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. INTERVENTION:In the clinical evaluation, a flocked nasopharyngeal swab sample was collected with the Copan ESwab and a mid-nasal sample from the other nostril was collected with the 3D-printed swab. RESULTS:In the laboratory evaluation, qualitative agreement with regard to SARS-CoV-2 detection in mock samples collected with 3D-printed swabs and two standard swabs was complete. In the clinical evaluation, qualitative agreement with regard to RNase P detection (a surrogate measure of adequate collection of human cellular material) in samples collected from 50 hospital staff members with standard and 3D-printed swabs was complete. Qualitative agreement with regard to SARS-CoV-2 detection in three pairs of 3D-printed mid-nasal and standard swab samples from two inpatients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 was also complete. CONCLUSIONS:Using 3D-printed swabs to collect nasal samples for SARS-CoV-2 testing is feasible, acceptable to patients and health carers, and convenient.
Project description:Highlights • Diagnosis of COVID-19 using 3D printed swabs needs prospective validation.• Two 3D printed designs demonstrate high concordance with traditional flocked swabs.• 3D printed swabs may be appropriate alternatives for diagnosing COVID-19. COVID-19 greatly disrupted the global supply chain of nasopharyngeal swabs, and thus new products have come to market with little data to support their use. In this prospective study, 2 new 3D printed nasopharyngeal swab designs were evaluated against the standard, flocked nasopharyngeal swab for the diagnosis of COVID-19. Seventy adult patients (37 COVID-positive and 33 COVID-negative) underwent consecutive diagnostic reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing, with a flocked swab followed by one or two 3D printed swabs. The “Lattice Swab” (manufacturer Resolution Medical) demonstrated 93.3% sensitivity (95% CI, 77.9%–99.2%) and 96.8% specificity (83.3%–99.9%), yielding ??=?0.90 (0.85–0.96). The “Origin KXG” (manufacturer Origin Laboratories) demonstrated 83.9% sensitivity (66.3%–94.6%) and 100% specificity (88.8%–100.0%), yielding ??=?0.84 (0.77–0.91). Both 3D printed nasopharyngeal swab results have high concordance with the control swab results. The decision to use 3D printed nasopharyngeal swabs during the COVID-19 pandemic should be strongly considered by clinical and research laboratories.
Project description:A simple, non-invasive sample collection method is key for the integration of pharmacogenetics into clinical practice. The aim of this study was to gain samples for pharmacogenetic testing and evaluate the variation between dry-flocked and sponge-tipped buccal swabs in yield and quality of DNA isolated.Thirty-one participants collected samples using dry-flocked swabs and sponge-tipped swabs. Samples were assessed for DNA yield, quality and genotyping performance on a qPCR OpenArray platform of 28 pharmacogenetic SNPs and a CYP2D6 TaqMan copy number variant. DNA from sponge-tipped swabs had a significantly greater yield compared to DNA collected with dry-flocked swabs (p?=?4.4?×?10-7). Moreover, highest genotyping call rates across all assays and highest CNV confidence scores were observed in DNA samples collected from sponge-tipped swabs (97% vs. 54% dry-flocked swabs; 0.99 vs. 0.88 dry-flocked swabs, respectively). Sample collection using sponge-tipped swabs provides a DNA source of sufficient quantity and quality for pharmacogenetic variant detection using qPCR.
Project description:Nasopharyngeal flocked swabs placed in viral transport media (VTM) are the preferred collection methodology for respiratory virus testing. Due to the rapid depletion of available reagents and swabs, we have validated an alternative swab placed in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) for use in respiratory virus testing in a SARS-CoV-2 real-time polymerase chain reaction assay and a multiplexed respiratory virus panel. We collected nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs and oropharyngeal (OP) swabs from 10 healthy volunteers. Flocked swabs were placed in VTM and alternative swabs in PBS. In this feasibility study, we show that NP collection is better for detection of human material than OP collection, as measured by significantly lower RNase P gene cycle threshold values, and that a Dacron polyester swab in PBS shows equivalent detection of SARS-CoV-2 and RSV to a flocked swab in VTM in contrived specimens. Diluted SARS-CoV-2-positive patient specimens are detectable for up to 72?h at 4?°C.
Project description:Objective:Vaginal self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing has recently been proposed to optimize cervical cancer screening coverage. The objective of this study was to compare the performance of self-taken samples using flocked and cotton swabs for HPV detection and cellular retrieval. Methods:We recruited women aged 21-65 years, referred to colposcopy at the Division of Gynecology of the Geneva University Hospitals between May and September 2016. Each participant collected 2 vaginal samples: 1 with a cotton swab and 1 with a flocked swab. A 1:1 randomization determined the order in which the 2 samples were taken. The swabs were introduced into a 20 mL PreservCyt® vial. Real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis using the Anyplex™ II HPV HR assay, cytofluorometric analysis and cytological cell counting were performed on each sample. Results:A total of 119 participants were recruited in the study. Their mean ± standard deviation age was 35.1±8.9 years. The HPV prevalence was 29.7% and 38.1% according to the cotton and flocked swab, respectively (p=0.006). The mean number of cells collected per milliliter according to cytofluorometry was 96,726.6 with the cotton swab and 425,544.3 with the flocked swab (p<0.001). The mean number of cells detected at cytological cell count was 13,130.42 using the cotton swab and 17,503.6 using the flocked swab (p<0.001). Conclusion:The flocked swab achieved a greater cellular retrieval and showed an improved performance in HPV detection. Further studies are needed to assess the usability and cost-effectiveness of the 2 self-sampling devices.
Project description:The 3D printing of nasopharyngeal swabs during the COVID-19 pandemic presents a central case of how to efficiently address a break in the global supply chain of medical equipment. Herein a comprehensive study of swab design considerations for mass production by stereolithography is presented. The retention and comfort performance of a range of novel designs of 3D-printed swabs are compared with the standard flocked-head swab used in clinical environments. Sample retention of the 3D swab is governed by the volume, porosity density, and void fraction of the head as well as by the pore geometry. 3D-printed swabs outperform conventional flock-head swabs in terms of sample retention. It is argued that mechanically functional designs of the swab head, such as corkscrew-shaped heads and negative Poisson ratio heads, maximize sample retention and improve patient comfort. In addition, available designs of swab shafts for an optimized sample collection procedure are characterized. The study is conducted in vitro, using artificial mucus, covering the full range of human mucus viscosities in a 3D-printed model of a nasal cavity. The work sets the path for the resilient supply of widespread sterile testing equipment as a rapid response to the current and future pandemics.