The use of “anal swabs” by Chinese authorities to test for Wuhan pneumonia (novel coronavirus disease, COVID-19) has sparked a backlash from foreign arrivals and officials. Even though the Chinese say the measure has a scientific basis, a microbiologist says that while the method has some significance, the basis for mass adoption of such tests is still not clear.
According to Deutsche Welle, Wendy Szymczak, a microbiologist at Montefiore Medical Center in New York, was interviewed and explained the advantages and disadvantages of the “anal swab” test. She noted that the main advantage of anal testing is that it can detect the virus for a longer period of Time after the onset of symptoms, about twice as long as a traditional nasopharyngeal swab, and possibly up to 70 days.
The usefulness of anal testing depends on the condition of the patient and the purpose of the test, but not all patients will excrete the virus in their stool; there is still no way to know why the virus takes longer to be excreted in the stool than in the upper respiratory tract, Samsak said.
However, Semzak stressed that anal testing should never be the only test, and that nasopharyngeal swabs should be done at the same time, but that’s where she sees the problem: “Does it make sense to do both nasopharyngeal and anal swabs?” Because that would require more additional workload as well as resources, and would also cause a lot of discomfort to travelers.
Samsak also said that if the infected patient “only” in the feces excretion of the virus, they are not sure what this means, and can not know whether the patient will pose a risk of infection of others.
Recent Comments