4.7 Review

Persistence and occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 in water and wastewater environments: a review of the current literature

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 29, 期 57, 页码 85658-85668

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-16919-3

关键词

Coronavirus; COVID-19; Fecal-oral transmission; Waterborne transmission; Wastewater; Disinfection; Persistence

资金

  1. NIH [R21AI157434]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review paper summarizes the current knowledge surrounding possible fecal-oral transmission of SARS-CoV-2, emphasizing the active replication of the virus in the human gastrointestinal system and its presence in water. It also highlights the limitations of current detection methods in distinguishing between infectious and non-infectious viral particles, calling for further research and development of more accurate detection methods.
As the world continues to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic, emerging evidence indicates that respiratory transmission may not the only pathway in which the virus can be spread. This review paper aims to summarize current knowledge surrounding possible fecal-oral transmission of SARS-CoV-2. It covers recent evidence of proliferation of SARS-CoV-2 in the gastrointestinal tract, as well as presence and persistence of SARS-CoV-2 in water, and suggested future directions. Research indicates that SARS-CoV-2 can actively replicate in the human gastrointestinal system and can subsequently be shed via feces. Several countries have reported SARS-CoV-2 RNA fractions in wastewater systems, and various factors such as temperature and presence of solids have been shown to affect the survival of the virus in water. The detection of RNA does not guarantee infectivity, as current methods such as RT-qPCR are not yet able to distinguish between infectious and non-infectious particles. More research is needed to determine survival time and potential infectivity, as well as to develop more accurate methods for detection and surveillance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据