Long GA, Xu Q, Sunkara J, Woodbury R, Brown K, Huang JJ, Xie Z, Chen X, Fu XA, Huang J. A comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review of breath analysis in detection of COVID-19 through Volatile organic compounds.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2024;
109:116309. [PMID:
38692202 DOI:
10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2024.116309]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2023] [Revised: 04/16/2024] [Accepted: 04/17/2024] [Indexed: 05/03/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
The COVID-19 pandemic had profound global impacts on daily lives, economic stability, and healthcare systems. Diagnosis of COVID-19 infection via RT-PCR was crucial in reducing spread of disease and informing treatment management. While RT-PCR is a key diagnostic test, there is room for improvement in the development of diagnostic criteria. Identification of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath provides a fast, reliable, and economically favorable alternative for disease detection.
METHODS
This meta-analysis analyzed the diagnostic performance of VOC-based breath analysis in detection of COVID-19 infection. A systematic review of twenty-nine papers using the grading criteria from Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and PRISMA guidelines was conducted.
RESULTS
The cumulative results showed a sensitivity of 0.92 (95 % CI, 90 %-95 %) and a specificity of 0.90 (95 % CI 87 %-93 %). Subgroup analysis by variant demonstrated strong sensitivity to the original strain compared to the Omicron and Delta variant in detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection. An additional subgroup analysis of detection methods showed eNose technology had the highest sensitivity when compared to GC-MS, GC-IMS, and high sensitivity-MS.
CONCLUSION
Overall, these results support the use of breath analysis as a new detection method of COVID-19 infection.
Collapse