Conclusions
Sensitivity limitations of currently used RT-qPCR solutions were found. These results will help to calibrate the impact of false negative diagnoses of COVID-19, and to detect and control new SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks and community transmissions.
Methods
Six different RT-qPCR alternatives were evaluated for SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 diagnosis based on standard RNA extractions. The one with best sensitivity was also assessed with direct nasopharyngeal swab viral transmission medium (VTM) heating; thus overcoming the RNA extraction step.
Results
A wide variability in the sensitivity of RT-qPCR solutions was found that was associated with a range of false negatives from 2% (0.3-7.9%) to 39.8% (30.2-50.2%). Direct preheating of VTM combined with the best solution provided a sensitivity of 72.5% (62.5-81.0%), in the range of some of the solutions based on standard RNA extractions. Conclusions: Sensitivity limitations of currently used RT-qPCR solutions were found. These results will help to calibrate the impact of false negative diagnoses of COVID-19, and to detect and control new SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks and community transmissions.