Sean Wei Xiang Ong1,2, Yian Kim Tan3, Kristen Kelli Coleman4,5, Boon Huan Tan3, Yee-Sin Leo1,2,5,6, Dong Ling Wang3, Ching Ging Ng3, Oon-Tek Ng1,2,6, Michelle Su Yen Wong3, Kalisvar Marimuthu1,2,5,7. 1. National Centre for Infectious Diseases, Singapore. 2. Department of Infectious Diseases, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore. 3. DSO National Laboratories, Singapore. 4. Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore. 5. Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore. 6. Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. 7. Infection Prevention and Control Office, Woodlands Health Campus, Singapore.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding the extent of aerosol-based transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is important for tailoring interventions for control of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Multiple studies have reported the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in air samples, but only one study has successfully recovered viable virus, although it is limited by its small sample size. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the extent of shedding of viable SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory aerosols from COVID-19 patients. METHODS: In this observational air sampling study, air samples from airborne-infection isolation rooms (AIIRs) and a community isolation facility (CIF) housing COVID-19 patients were collected using a water vapor condensation method into liquid collection media. Samples were tested for presence of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR), and qRT-PCR-positive samples were tested for viability using viral culture. RESULTS: Samples from 6 (50%) of the 12 sampling cycles in hospital rooms were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, including aerosols ranging from <1 µm to >4 µm in diameter. Of 9 samples from the CIF, 1 was positive via qRT-PCR. Viral RNA concentrations ranged from 179 to 2,738 ORF1ab gene copies per cubic meter of air. Virus cultures were negative after 4 blind passages. CONCLUSION: Although SARS-CoV-2 is readily captured in aerosols, virus culture remains challenging despite optimized sampling methodologies to preserve virus viability. Further studies on aerosol-based transmission and control of SARS-CoV-2 are needed.
BACKGROUND: Understanding the extent of aerosol-based transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is important for tailoring interventions for control of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Multiple studies have reported the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in air samples, but only one study has successfully recovered viable virus, although it is limited by its small sample size. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the extent of shedding of viable SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory aerosols from COVID-19patients. METHODS: In this observational air sampling study, air samples from airborne-infection isolation rooms (AIIRs) and a community isolation facility (CIF) housing COVID-19patients were collected using a water vapor condensation method into liquid collection media. Samples were tested for presence of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR), and qRT-PCR-positive samples were tested for viability using viral culture. RESULTS: Samples from 6 (50%) of the 12 sampling cycles in hospital rooms were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, including aerosols ranging from <1 µm to >4 µm in diameter. Of 9 samples from the CIF, 1 was positive via qRT-PCR. Viral RNA concentrations ranged from 179 to 2,738 ORF1ab gene copies per cubic meter of air. Virus cultures were negative after 4 blind passages. CONCLUSION: Although SARS-CoV-2 is readily captured in aerosols, virus culture remains challenging despite optimized sampling methodologies to preserve virus viability. Further studies on aerosol-based transmission and control of SARS-CoV-2 are needed.
Entities:
Keywords:
COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; aerosols; air sampling; airborne; viral culture
Authors: Marc E J Stettler; Robert T Nishida; Pedro M de Oliveira; Léo C C Mesquita; Tyler J Johnson; Edwin R Galea; Angus Grandison; John Ewer; David Carruthers; David Sykes; Prashant Kumar; Eldad Avital; Asiri I B Obeysekara; Denis Doorly; Yannis Hardalupas; David C Green; Simon Coldrick; Simon Parker; Adam M Boies Journal: R Soc Open Sci Date: 2022-05-04 Impact factor: 3.653
Authors: Morgan A Lane; Maria Walawender; Andrew S Webster; Erik A Brownsword; Jessica M Ingersoll; Candace Miller; Jesse Waggoner; Timothy M Uyeki; William G Lindsley; Colleen S Kraft Journal: Viruses Date: 2021-11-23 Impact factor: 5.048
Authors: Tyler J Johnson; Robert T Nishida; Ashlesha P Sonpar; Yi-Chan James Lin; Kimberley A Watson; Stephanie W Smith; John M Conly; David H Evans; Jason S Olfert Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-03-03 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Priscilla G Silva; Pedro T B S Branco; Ruben R G Soares; João R Mesquita; Sofia I V Sousa Journal: Indoor Air Date: 2022-08 Impact factor: 6.554