Bioaerosol sampling for SARS-CoV-2 in a referral center with critically ill COVID-19 patients March-May 2020

Air Change Rate and SARS-CoV-2 Exposure in Hospitals and Residences: A Meta-Analysis

As SARS-CoV-2 swept across the globe, increased ventilation and implementation of air cleaning were emphasized by the US CDC and WHO as important strategies to reduce the risk of inhalation exposure to the virus. To assess whether higher ventilation and air cleaning rates lead to lower exposure risk to SARS-CoV-2, 1274 manuscripts published between April 2020 and September 2022 were screened using key words "airborne SARS-CoV-2 or "SARS-CoV-2 aerosol". Ninety-three studies involved air sampling at locations with known sources (hospitals and residences) were selected and associated data were compiled. Two metrics were used to assess exposure risk: SARS-CoV-2 concentration and SARS-CoV-2 detection rate in air samples. Locations were categorized by type (hospital or residence) and proximity to the sampling location housing the isolated/quarantined patient (primary or secondary). The results showed that hospital wards had lower airborne virus concentrations than residential isolation rooms. A negative correlation was found between airborne virus concentrations in primary-occupancy areas and air changes per hour (ACH). In hospital settings, sample positivity rates were significantly reduced in secondary-occupancy areas compared to primary-occupancy areas, but they were similar across sampling locations in residential settings. ACH and sample positivity rates were negatively correlated, though the effect was diminished when ACH values exceeded 8. While limitations associated with diverse sampling protocols exist, data considered by this meta-analysis support the notion that higher ACH may reduce exposure risks to the virus in ambient air.

Research progress of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 on aerosol collection and detection

The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in late 2019 has negatively affected people's lives and productivity. Because the mode of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is of great concern, this review discusses the sources of virus aerosols and possible transmission routes. First, we discuss virus aerosol collection methods, including natural sedimentation, solid impact, liquid impact, centrifugal, cyclone and electrostatic adsorption methods. Then, we review common virus aerosol detection methods, including virus culture, metabolic detection, nucleic acid-based detection and immunology-based detection methods. Finally, possible solutions for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 aerosols are introduced. Point-of-care testing has long been a focus of attention. In the near future, the development of an instrument that integrates sampling and output results will enable the real-time, automatic monitoring of patients.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the workplace: Key findings from a rapid review of the literature

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the primary route of transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus was not well understood. Research gathered from other respiratory infectious diseases, including other coronaviruses, was the basis for the initial perceptions for transmission of SARS-CoV-2. To better understand transmission of SARS-CoV-2, a rapid literature review was conducted from literature generated March 19, 2020, through September 23, 2021. 18,616 unique results were identified from literature databases and screened. Of these, 279 key articles were reviewed and abstracted covering critical topics such as environmental/workplace monitoring, sampling and analytical method evaluation, and the ability of the virus to remain intact and infectious during sampling. This paper describes the results of the rapid literature review, which evaluated pathways that contribute to transmission as well as the strengths and limitations of current sampling approaches. This review also evaluates how different factors, including environmental conditions and surface characteristics, could impact the transmission potential of SARS-CoV-2. A continual rapid review in the midst of a pandemic proved particularly useful for quickly understanding the transmission parameters of the virus and enabled us to comprehensively assess literature, respond to workplace questions, and evaluate our understanding as the science evolved. Air and surface sampling with the accompanying analytical methods were not generally effective in recovering SARS-CoV-2 viable virus or RNA in many likely contaminated environments. In light of these findings, the development of validated sampling and analysis methods is critical for determining worker exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and to assess the impact of mitigation efforts.

On-site bioaerosol sampling and detection in microfluidic platforms

As the recent coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and several severe illnesses such as Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), Influenza A virus (IAV) flu, and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) have been found to be airborne, the importance of monitoring bioaerosols for the control and prevention of airborne epidemic diseases outbreaks is increasing. However, current aerosol collection and detection technologies may be limited to on-field use for real-time monitoring because of the relatively low concentrations of targeted bioaerosols in air samples. Microfluidic devices have been used as lab-on-a-chip platforms and exhibit outstanding capabilities in airborne particulate collection, sample processing, and target molecule analysis, thereby highlighting their potential for on-site bioaerosol monitoring. This review discusses the measurement of airborne microorganisms from air samples, including sources and transmission of bioaerosols, sampling strategies, and analytical methodologies. Recent advancements in microfluidic platforms have focused on bioaerosol sample preparation strategies, such as sorting, concentrating, and extracting, as well as rapid and field-deployable detection methods for analytes on microfluidic chips. Furthermore, we discuss an integrated platform for on-site bioaerosol analyses. We believe that our review significantly contributes to the literature as it assists in bridging the knowledge gaps in bioaerosol monitoring using microfluidic platforms.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Air and on Surfaces in Rooms of Infected Nursing Home Residents

There is an ongoing debate on airborne transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as a risk factor for infection. In this study, the level of SARS-CoV-2 in air and on surfaces of SARS-CoV-2 infected nursing home residents was assessed to gain insight in potential transmission routes. During outbreaks, air samples were collected using three different active and one passive air sampling technique in rooms of infected patients. Oropharyngeal swabs (OPS) of the residents and dry surface swabs were collected. Additionally, longitudinal passive air samples were collected during a period of 4 months in common areas of the wards. Presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was determined using RT-qPCR, targeting the RdRp- and E-genes. OPS, samples of two active air samplers and surface swabs with Ct-value ≤35 were tested for the presence of infectious virus by cell culture. In total, 360 air and 319 surface samples from patient rooms and common areas were collected. In rooms of 10 residents with detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in OPS, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 93 of 184 collected environmental samples (50.5%) (lowest Ct 29.5), substantially more than in the rooms of residents with negative OPS on the day of environmental sampling (n = 2) (3.6%). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was most frequently present in the larger particle size fractions [>4 μm 60% (6/10); 1-4 μm 50% (5/10); <1 μm 20% (2/10)] (Fischer exact test P = 0.076). The highest proportion of RNA-positive air samples on room level was found with a filtration-based sampler 80% (8/10) and the cyclone-based sampler 70% (7/10), and impingement-based sampler 50% (5/10). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 10 out of 12 (83%) passive air samples in patient rooms. Both high-touch and low-touch surfaces contained SARS-CoV-2 genome in rooms of residents with positive OPS [high 38% (21/55); low 50% (22/44)]. In one active air sample, infectious virus in vitro was detected. In conclusion, SARS-CoV-2 is frequently detected in air and on surfaces in the immediate surroundings of room-isolated COVID-19 patients, providing evidence of environmental contamination. The environmental contamination of SARS-CoV-2 and infectious aerosols confirm the potential for transmission via air up to several meters.

SARS-CoV-2 air sampling: A systematic review on the methodologies for detection and infectivity

This systematic review aims to present an overview of the current aerosol sampling methods (and equipment) being used to investigate the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in the air, along with the main parameters reported in the studies that are essential to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of each method and perspectives for future research regarding this mode of transmission. A systematic literature review was performed on PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus to assess the current air sampling methodologies being applied to SARS-CoV-2. Most of the studies took place in indoor environments and healthcare settings and included air and environmental sampling. The collection mechanisms used were impinger, cyclone, impactor, filters, water-based condensation, and passive sampling. Most of the reviewed studies used RT-PCR to test the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the collected samples. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected with all collection mechanisms. From the studies detecting the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, fourteen assessed infectivity. Five studies detected viable viruses using impactor, water-based condensation, and cyclone collection mechanisms. There is a need for a standardized protocol for sampling SARS-CoV-2 in air, which should also account for other influencing parameters, including air exchange ratio in the room sampled, relative humidity, temperature, and lighting conditions.

Revisiting SARS-CoV-2 environmental contamination by patients with COVID-19: The Omicron variant does not differ from previous strains

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron strain emergence raised concerns that its enhanced infectivity is partly due to altered spread/contamination modalities. We therefore sampled high-contact surfaces and air in close proximity to patients who were verified as infected with the Omicron strain, using identical protocols applied to sample patients positive to the original or Alpha strains. Cumulatively, for all 3 strains, viral RNA was detected in 90 of 168 surfaces and 6 of 49 air samples (mean cycle threshold [Ct]=35.2±2.5). No infective virus was identified. No significant differences in prevalence were found between strains.

A review on measurements of SARS-CoV-2 genetic material in air in outdoor and indoor environments: Implication for airborne transmission

Airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has been object of debate in the scientific community since the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic. This mechanism of transmission could arise from virus-laden aerosol released by infected individuals and it is influenced by several factors. Among these, the concentration and size distribution of virus-laden particles play an important role. The knowledge regarding aerosol transmission increases as new evidence is collected in different studies, even if it is not yet available a standard protocol regarding air sampling and analysis, which can create difficulties in the interpretation and application of results. This work reports a systematic review of current knowledge gained by 73 published papers on experimental determination of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in air comparing different environments: outdoors, indoor hospitals and healthcare settings, and public community indoors. Selected papers furnished 77 datasets: outdoor studies (9/77, 11.7%) and indoor studies (68/77. 88.3%). The indoor datasets in hospitals were the vast majority (58/68, 85.3%), and the remaining (10/68, 14.7%) were classified as community indoors. The fraction of studies having positive samples, as well as positivity rates (i.e. ratios between positive and total samples) are significantly larger in hospitals compared to the other typologies of sites. Contamination of surfaces was more frequent (in indoor datasets) compared to contamination of air samples; however, the average positivity rate was lower compared to that of air. Concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in air were highly variables and, on average, lower in outdoors compared to indoors. Among indoors, concentrations in community indoors appear to be lower than those in hospitals and healthcare settings.

SARS-CoV-2 detection in bioaerosols using a liquid impinger collector and ddPCR

The airborne route is the dominant form of COVID-19 transmission, and therefore, the development of methodologies to quantify SARS-CoV-2 in bioaerosols is needed. We aimed to identify SARS-CoV-2 in bioaerosols by using a highly efficient sampler for the collection of 1-3 µm particles, followed by a highly sensitive detection method. 65 bioaerosol samples were collected in hospital rooms in the presence of a COVID-19 patient using a liquid impinger sampler. The SARS-CoV-2 genome was detected by ddPCR using different primer/probe sets. 44.6% of the samples resulted positive for SARS-CoV-2 following this protocol. By increasing the sampled air volume from 339 to 650 L, the percentage of positive samples went from 41% to 50%. We detected five times less positives with a commercial one-step RT-PCR assay. However, the selection of primer/probe sets might be one of the most determining factor for bioaerosol SARS-CoV-2 detection since with the ORF1ab set more than 40% of the samples were positive, compared to <10% with other sets. In conclusion, the use of a liquid impinger collector and ddPCR is an adequate strategy to detect SARS-CoV-2 in bioaerosols. However, there are still some methodological aspects that must be adjusted to optimize and standardize a definitive protocol.

Estimating Tuberculosis Transmission Risks in a Primary Care Clinic in South Africa: Modeling of Environmental and Clinical Data

BACKGROUND

Congregate settings, such as healthcare clinics, may play an essential role in Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) transmission. Using patient and environmental data, we studied transmission at a primary care clinic in South Africa.

METHODS

We collected patient movements, cough frequency, and clinical data, and measured indoor carbon dioxide (CO2) levels, relative humidity, and Mtb genomes in the air. We used negative binomial regression model to investigate associations.

RESULTS

We analyzed 978 unique patients who contributed 14 795 data points. The median patient age was 33 (interquartile range [IQR], 26-41) years, and 757 (77.4%) were female. Overall, median CO2 levels were 564 (IQR 495-646) parts per million and were highest in the morning. Median number of coughs per day was 466 (IQR, 368-503), and overall median Mtb DNA copies/μL/day was 4.2 (IQR, 1.2-9.5). We found an increased presence of Mtb DNA in the air of 32% (95% credible interval, 7%-63%) per 100 additional young adults (aged 15-29 years) and 1% (0-2%) more Mtb DNA per 10% increase of relative humidity. Estimated cumulative transmission risks for patients attending the clinic monthly for at least 1 hour range between 9% and 29%.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified young adults and relative humidity as potentially important factors for transmission risks in healthcare clinics. Our approach should be used to detect transmission and evaluate infection control interventions.

Sampling for SARS-CoV-2 Aerosols in Hospital Patient Rooms

Evidence varies as to how far aerosols spread from individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 in hospital rooms. We investigated the presence of aerosols containing SARS-CoV-2 inside of dedicated COVID-19 patient rooms. Three National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health BC 251 two-stage cyclone samplers were set up in each patient room for a six-hour sampling period. Samplers were place on tripods, which each held two samplers at various heights above the floor. Extracted samples underwent reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for selected gene regions of the SARS-CoV-2 virus nucleocapsid. Patient medical data were compared between participants in rooms where virus-containing aerosols were detected and those where they were not. Of 576 aerosols samples collected from 19 different rooms across 32 participants, 3% (19) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, the majority from near the head and foot of the bed. Seven of the positive samples were collected inside a single patient room. No significant differences in participant clinical characteristics were found between patients in rooms with positive and negative aerosol samples. SARS-CoV-2 viral aerosols were detected from the patient rooms of nine participants (28%). These findings provide reassurance that personal protective equipment that was recommended for this virus is appropriate given its spread in hospital rooms.

Investigating SARS-CoV-2 persistent contamination in different indoor environments

Environmental contamination caused by COVID-19 patients could be a medium of transmission. Previous reports of SARS-CoV-2 in environmental surfaces were about short-term contamination. This study investigated SARS-CoV-2 RNA existence in room-temperature and low-temperature environments long after exposure (>28 days). A department store, where a COVID-19 outbreak was occurred in January 2020 (the epicenter of 43 COVID-19 patients), and a patient's apartment were included as room-temperature environments after being blocked for 57 days and 48 days, respectively. Seven cold storages and imported frozen foods inside were included as low-temperature environments (under -18 °C). Twenty food markets with potential contamination of imported frozen foods were also included to study the consecutive contamination. Information about temperature, relative humidity, and the number of days of environmental samples since the last exposure was collected and analyzed. In sum, 11,808 swab samples were collected before disinfection, of which 35 samples were positive. Persistent contamination of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was identified in the apartment (6/19), the department store (3/50), food packages in cold storages (23/1360), environmental surfaces of cold storages (2/345), and a package in the food market (1/10,034). Two positive samples were isolated from the bathroom of the apartment (66.7 %, 2/3), and doorknobs were proved with contamination in the apartment (40 %, 2/5) and cold storage (33.3 %, 1/3). The epidemiology information and environmental contamination results of an imported frozen food related COVID-19 case (138th COVID-19 patient in Tianjin) were analyzed. Based on the Ct values, the number of copies of two target genes was calculated by standard curves and linear regressions. In conclusion, SARS-CoV-2 RNA can be detected in room-temperature environments at least 57 days after the last exposure, much longer than previous reports. Based on the results of this study and previous studies, infectious SARS-CoV-2 could exist for at least 60 days on the surface of cold-chain food packages. Doorknobs and toilets (bathrooms) were important positions in COVID-19 control. High-risk populations of cold-chain-related logistic operations, such as porters, require strict prevention and high-level personal protection.

Current Scenario and Challenges in the Direct Identification of Microorganisms Using MALDI TOF MS

MALDI TOF MS-based microbial identification significantly lowers the operational costs because of minimal requirements of substrates and reagents for extraction. Therefore, it has been widely used in varied applications such as clinical, food, military, and ecological research. However, the MALDI TOF MS method is laced with many challenges including its limitation of the reference spectrum. This review briefly introduces the background of MALDI TOF MS technology, including sample preparation and workflow. We have primarily discussed the application of MALDI TOF MS in the identification of microorganisms. Furthermore, we have discussed the current trends for bioaerosol detection using MALDI TOF MS and the limitations and challenges involved, and finally the approaches to overcome these challenges.