Skip to main content
. 2021 Nov 12;11(11):2089. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11112089

Table 4.

Comparison of urinary SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection in literature reports.

Authors Sampling Method Detecting Method Positive Rate Target Gene Detection Kit Participants Condition Refs.
Huiming Wang, et al. Urine sediments RT-PCR 28.3% NP and ORF1ab Zhongzhi, Wuhan 30 non-severe
23 severe
This article
Luwen Wang, et al. Urine sediments RT-PCR 7.5% NP and ORF1ab Zhongzhi, Wuhan 48 non-CKD, 5 CKD [11]
Chaolin Huang, et al. Urine RT-PCR 11% NP and ORF1ab ND 9 moderates [2]
Hongzhou Lu, et al. Urine RT-PCR 6.9% NP and ORF1ab Master Biotechnology, China Recovered [7]
Zhenglin Yang, et al. Urine RT-PCR 0% NP and ORF1ab GeneoDx (GZ-TRM2, China), Maccura (Sichuan, China) and Liferiver (W-RR-0479-02, China) 5 Uncomplicated, 14 complicated [9]
Barnaby Edward Young, et al Urine RT-PCR 0% N, S, and ORF1ab EZ1 virus mini kit v2.0
(Qiagen)
6 mild, 4 severe [10]
Roman Wölfel, et al. Urine RT-PCR 0% E- and RdRp Tib-Molbiol, Berlin, Germany mild [12]
Chin Ion Lei, et al. Urine qRT-PCR 0% NP and ORF1ab BioGerm, China 2 mild, 4 moderates [12]
Fujie Zhang, et al. Urine RT-PCR and ddPCR 0% NP and ORF1ab Shanghai BioGerm Medical Technology Co. LTD, China (RT-PCR)
TargetingOne, Beijing, China (ddPCR)
ND [13]

ND: not determined. Detecting Method: reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR); Positive Rate: positive rate of urinary SARS-CoV-2 RNA; Target Gene: Targeting SARS-CoV-2 genes.