SARS-CoV-2 in Environmental Samples of Quarantined Households

  1. Manuel Döhla
  2. Bianca Schulte
  3. Gero Wilbring
  4. Beate Mareike Kümmerer
  5. Christin Döhla
  6. Esther Sib
  7. Enrico Richter
  8. Patrick Frank Ottensmeyer
  9. Alexandra Haag
  10. Steffen Engelhart
  11. Anna Maria Eis-Hübinger
  12. Martin Exner
  13. Nico Tom Mutters
  14. Ricarda Maria Schmithausen
  15. Hendrik Streeck

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The role of environmental transmission of SARS-CoV-2 remains unclear. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate whether viral contamination of air, wastewater, and surfaces in quarantined households result in a higher risk for exposed persons. For this study, a source population of 21 households under quarantine conditions with at least one person who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA were randomly selected from a community in North Rhine-Westphalia in March 2020. All individuals living in these households participated in this study and provided throat swabs for analysis. Air and wastewater samples and surface swabs were obtained from each household and analysed using qRT-PCR. Positive swabs were further cultured to analyse for viral infectivity. Out of all the 43 tested adults, 26 (60.47%) tested positive using qRT-PCR. All 15 air samples were qRT-PCR-negative. In total, 10 out of 66 wastewater samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2 (15.15%) and 4 out of 119 surface samples (3.36%). No statistically significant correlation between qRT-PCR-positive environmental samples and the extent of the spread of infection between household members was observed. No infectious virus could be propagated under cell culture conditions. Taken together, our study demonstrates a low likelihood of transmission via surfaces. However, to definitively assess the importance of hygienic behavioural measures in the reduction of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, larger studies should be designed to determine the proportionate contribution of smear vs. droplet transmission.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.3390/v14051075
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.28.20114041: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomization21 households, with at least one person tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, were randomly selected from this list.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Cell Line Authenticationnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Experimental Models: Cell Lines
    SentencesResources
    The isolation of infectious virus from environmental samples was attempted by seeding Vero E6 cells in 24 well plates or T25 flasks at a density of 70-80 %.
    Vero E6
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analysis: Statistical analysis was performed via Stata IC 15.1 (StataCorp, USA).
    StataCorp
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)

    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.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.28.20114041v1 on medRxiv