Cargando…
Determining the communicable period of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review of the literature, March to September 2020
INTRODUCTION: Standard testing for infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is based on RT-PCR tests, but detection of viral genetic material alone does not indicate ongoing infectious potential. The ability to isolate whole virus represents a better proxy for infe...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8034061/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33834961 http://dx.doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.14.2001506 |
_version_ | 1783676473999097856 |
---|---|
author | Park, Mina Pawliuk, Colleen Nguyen, Tribesty Griffitt, Amanda Dix-Cooper, Linda Fourik, Nadia Dawes, Martin |
author_facet | Park, Mina Pawliuk, Colleen Nguyen, Tribesty Griffitt, Amanda Dix-Cooper, Linda Fourik, Nadia Dawes, Martin |
author_sort | Park, Mina |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Standard testing for infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is based on RT-PCR tests, but detection of viral genetic material alone does not indicate ongoing infectious potential. The ability to isolate whole virus represents a better proxy for infectivity. AIM: The objective of this study was to gain an understanding of the current literature and compare the reported periods of positive SARS-CoV-2 detection from studies that conducted RT-PCR testing in addition to experiments isolating whole virus. METHODS: Using a rapid review approach, studies reporting empirical data on the duration of positive RT-PCR results and/or successful viral isolation following SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans were identified through searches of peer-reviewed and pre-print health sciences literature. Articles were screened for relevance, then data were extracted, analysed, and synthesised. RESULTS: Of the 160 studies included for qualitative analysis, 84% (n = 135) investigated duration of positive RT-PCR tests only, 5% (n = 8) investigated duration of successful viral isolations, while 11% (n = 17) included measurements on both. There was significant heterogeneity in reported data. There was a prolonged time to viral clearance when deduced from RT-PCR tests compared with viral isolations (median: 26 vs 9 days). DISCUSSION: Findings from this review support a minimum 10-day period of isolation but certain cases where virus was isolated after 10 days were identified. Given the extended time to viral clearance from RT-PCR tests, future research should ensure standard reporting of RT-PCR protocols and results to help inform testing policies aimed at clearance from isolation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8034061 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80340612021-04-12 Determining the communicable period of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review of the literature, March to September 2020 Park, Mina Pawliuk, Colleen Nguyen, Tribesty Griffitt, Amanda Dix-Cooper, Linda Fourik, Nadia Dawes, Martin Euro Surveill Review INTRODUCTION: Standard testing for infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is based on RT-PCR tests, but detection of viral genetic material alone does not indicate ongoing infectious potential. The ability to isolate whole virus represents a better proxy for infectivity. AIM: The objective of this study was to gain an understanding of the current literature and compare the reported periods of positive SARS-CoV-2 detection from studies that conducted RT-PCR testing in addition to experiments isolating whole virus. METHODS: Using a rapid review approach, studies reporting empirical data on the duration of positive RT-PCR results and/or successful viral isolation following SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans were identified through searches of peer-reviewed and pre-print health sciences literature. Articles were screened for relevance, then data were extracted, analysed, and synthesised. RESULTS: Of the 160 studies included for qualitative analysis, 84% (n = 135) investigated duration of positive RT-PCR tests only, 5% (n = 8) investigated duration of successful viral isolations, while 11% (n = 17) included measurements on both. There was significant heterogeneity in reported data. There was a prolonged time to viral clearance when deduced from RT-PCR tests compared with viral isolations (median: 26 vs 9 days). DISCUSSION: Findings from this review support a minimum 10-day period of isolation but certain cases where virus was isolated after 10 days were identified. Given the extended time to viral clearance from RT-PCR tests, future research should ensure standard reporting of RT-PCR protocols and results to help inform testing policies aimed at clearance from isolation. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) 2021-04-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8034061/ /pubmed/33834961 http://dx.doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.14.2001506 Text en This article is copyright of the authors or their affiliated institutions, 2021. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) Licence. You may share and adapt the material, but must give appropriate credit to the source, provide a link to the licence, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Review Park, Mina Pawliuk, Colleen Nguyen, Tribesty Griffitt, Amanda Dix-Cooper, Linda Fourik, Nadia Dawes, Martin Determining the communicable period of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review of the literature, March to September 2020 |
title | Determining the communicable period of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review of the literature, March to September 2020 |
title_full | Determining the communicable period of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review of the literature, March to September 2020 |
title_fullStr | Determining the communicable period of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review of the literature, March to September 2020 |
title_full_unstemmed | Determining the communicable period of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review of the literature, March to September 2020 |
title_short | Determining the communicable period of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review of the literature, March to September 2020 |
title_sort | determining the communicable period of sars-cov-2: a rapid review of the literature, march to september 2020 |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8034061/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33834961 http://dx.doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.14.2001506 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT parkmina determiningthecommunicableperiodofsarscov2arapidreviewoftheliteraturemarchtoseptember2020 AT pawliukcolleen determiningthecommunicableperiodofsarscov2arapidreviewoftheliteraturemarchtoseptember2020 AT nguyentribesty determiningthecommunicableperiodofsarscov2arapidreviewoftheliteraturemarchtoseptember2020 AT griffittamanda determiningthecommunicableperiodofsarscov2arapidreviewoftheliteraturemarchtoseptember2020 AT dixcooperlinda determiningthecommunicableperiodofsarscov2arapidreviewoftheliteraturemarchtoseptember2020 AT fouriknadia determiningthecommunicableperiodofsarscov2arapidreviewoftheliteraturemarchtoseptember2020 AT dawesmartin determiningthecommunicableperiodofsarscov2arapidreviewoftheliteraturemarchtoseptember2020 |