Presence of Live SARS-CoV-2 Virus in Feces of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Patients: A Rapid Review
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a rapidly escalating pandemic that has spread to many parts of the world. The disease has already affected over 6 million individuals, with over 400,000 fatalities. Recent studies have confirmed the presence of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids in feces of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients using RT-PCR tests. It is however, still unclear as to whether or not live SARS-CoV-2 virus is actually present in feces of these patients. In this rapid review, we systematically analyzed literature to establish any evidence of live SARS-CoV- 2 virus in fecal samples of COVID-19 patients. We identified 4 studies (one case report, 2 case series and 1 cohort study) where the SARS-CoV-2 was successfully isolated from fecal samples of COVID-19 patients using culture techniques. Therefore, there is some evidence COVID-19 could shed live SARS-CoV-2 virus via the gastro-intestinal tract. Larger studies are needed to corroborate these findings, as well as to determine its potential for disease transmission and infection, and possible implications for COVID-19 discharge and isolation policies.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.27.20105429: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Literature Search Strategy: A comprehensive and systematic search of literature from November 1, 2019 to June 6th, 2020 was conducted on the Medline (PubMed interface) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) to identify studies eligible for inclusion. Medlinesuggested: (MEDLINE, RRID:SCR_002185)The PubMed function “related articles” was used to extend the search. PubMedsuggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.27.20105429: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Literature Search Strategy: A comprehensive and systematic search of literature from November 1, 2019 to June 6th, 2020 was conducted on the Medline (PubMed interface) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) to identify studies eligible for inclusion. Medlinesuggested: (MEDLINE, RRID:SCR_002185)The PubMed function “related articles” was used to extend the search. PubMedsuggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
