COVID-19 persistence on different materials practical implications

Enric Marco
25-Mar-2020 (6 years 2 months 11 days ago)

Commented article
Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1. Letter published on March 17, 2020, at NEJM.org by Dr. van Doremalen, Mr. Bushmaker, and Mr. Morris. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2004973
Read the article summary

Comment

Farm biosecurity is key to preventing the entrance of new pathogens and preventing pig diseases. Pig diseases reduce, in general, farm profitability and this is the main reason why we want them out of our premises. But human diseases can also be devastating for farm profitability, especially when they are contagious. This is the case with SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans (Covid-19). Covid-19 can put the human teams on our farms at risk. The review on coronavirus persistence on different materials and in aerosols can help us implement measures on swine farms to reduce the human risk of infection. Based on the knowledge we have today, we can divide the measures into two types: external and internal biosecurity measures.

External biosecurity

The basic rule in these circumstances is to avoid the entrance of any visitors on the farm unless they are essential for maintaining normal operation. If visitors have to come on the farm, the minimum biosecurity standard should be:

But a farm also needs to introduce materials which someone has to bring into the facilities such as: semen doses, medication, ear tags, markers… Those materials can be contaminated by infected aerosols and they have to be considered as possible sources of infection. Here we will describe some easy to apply procedures which can help in reducing risk.

Internal biosecurity

Not all people infected by SARS-CoV-2 have developed clinical signs; a large proportion of infected people have been asymptomatic. An asymptomatic infected farm worker can shed the virus through aerosols and infect other people or contaminate materials. The following measures aim to reduce contagion among workers.

Summary of the commented article
Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1. Letter published on March 17, 2020, at NEJM.org by Dr. van Doremalen, Mr. Bushmaker, and Mr. Morris. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2004973


This study analyzed the aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 and compared it with SARS-CoV-1, the most closely related human coronavirus.

The data consisted of 10 experimental conditions involving two viruses (SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1) in five environmental conditions (aerosols, plastic, stainless steel, copper, and cardboard) kept at 21-23°C and 65% hrelative humidity.

Stability on aerosols: SARS-CoV-2 remained viable in aerosols for the length of the experiment (3 hours) with a reduction in infectious titer from 103.5 to 102.7 TCID50/L.

Coronavirus persistence in materials
SARS-CoV-2 viable virus could be detected up to 72 hours post application in different surfaces though the virus titer was greatly reduced. The survival rate is greatly influenced by the temperature, humidity and amount of virus.

Plastic: SARS-CoV-2 remained viable in plastic after 72 hours (from 103.7 to 100.6 TCID50/mL)

Steel: SARS-CoV-2 remained viable in stainless steel after 72 hours (from 103.7 to 100.6 TCID50/mL ) with a median half-life estimate that was roughly 5.6 hours.

Cardboard: No viable SARS-CoV-2 was measured after 24 hours but results must be interpreted with caution as they were very variable.

The titer of aerosolized viable virus is expressed in 50% tissue-culture infectious dose (TCID<sub>50</sub>) per liter of air. Viruses were applied to copper, cardboard, stainless steel, and plastic maintained at 21 to 23&deg;C and 40% relative humidity over 7 days. The titer of viable virus is expressed as TCID<sub>50</sub> per milliliter of collection medium. All samples were quantified by end-point titration on Vero E6 cells. Plots show the means and standard errors ( bars) across three replicates.

The study found that the stability of SARS-CoV-2 was similar to that of SARS-CoV-1 under the experimental circumstances tested. The results indicate that aerosol and fomite transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is plausible, since the virus can remain viable and infectious in aerosols for hours and on surfaces up to days (depending on the inoculum shed). These findings echo those with SARS-CoV-1, in which these forms of transmission were associated with nosocomial spread and super-spreading events, and they provide information for pandemic mitigation efforts.