Concentration and detection of SARS coronavirus in sewage from Xiao Tang Shan Hospital and the 309th Hospital

Wang, Xin Wei; Li, Jin Song; Guo, Ting Kai; Zhen, Bei; Kong, Qing Xin; Yi, Bin; Li, Zhong; Song, Nong; Jin, Min; Xiao, Wenjun; Zhu, Xiu Mei; Gu, Chang Qing; Yin, Jun; Wei, Wei; Yao, Wei; Liu, Chao; Li, Jian Feng; Ou, Guo Rong; Wang, Min Nian; Fang, Ting; Wang, Gui Jie; Qiu, Yao Hui; Wu, Huai Huan; Chao, Feng‐lei; Li, Jun Wen

doi:10.1016/j.jviromet.2005.03.022

Cited by 150 publications

(141 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

137

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently, bats were reported as natural carriers of SARS virus . There is certain evidence suggesting that SARS-CoV spreads via droplet and contact transmission and via fecal-oral route (Muller and McGeer, 2006;Wang et al, 2005). Through these routes, SARS-CoV can spread/transmit from animal to human or from human to human.…”

Section: Pathogenesis Of Sarsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pathogenetic mechanisms of severe acute respiratory syndrome

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is an acute respiratory disease with significant morbidity and mortality. While its clinical manifestations have been extensively studied, its pathogenesis is not yet fully understood. A limited number of autopsy studies have revealed that the lungs and the immune system are the organs that sustain the most severe damage. Other organs affected include the kidneys, brain, digestive tract, heart, liver, thyroid gland and urogenital tract. The primary target cells are pneumocytes and enterocytes, both cell types abundantly expressing angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 which is the main SARS-CoV receptor. Other cell types infected include the epithelial cells of renal tubules, cerebral neurons, and immune cells. The pathology of this disease results from both direct and indirect injury. Direct injury is caused by infection of the target cells by the virus. Indirect injury mainly results from immune responses, circulatory dysfunction, and hypoxia. In this review, we summarize the major pathological findings at the gross, cellular and molecular levels and discuss the various possible mechanisms that may contribute to the pathogenesis of SARS. The implications of the proposed pathogenesis for prevention, diagnosis and therapy of the disease are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Pathogenesis Of Sarsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pathogenetic mechanisms of severe acute respiratory syndrome

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Noroviruses, coronaviruses and HAV were not primary concerns during the development of the pathogen standards governing biosolids, but have since been documented as causative agents of serious and highly communicable illnesses. The recent surge in clinical cases caused by these enteric viruses emphasizes the need to determine whether the current indicator, EVs, can accurately predict their presence in biosolids and persistence during treatment (Wang et al. 2005; Colomba et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inactivation of hepatitis A HM-175/18f, reovirus T1 Lang and MS2 during alkaline stabilization of human biosolids

Katz

Margolin

2007

Journal of Applied Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To compare the inactivation rates of male‐specific bacteriophage‐2 (MS2), hepatitis A HM‐175/18f (HM‐175) and reovirus T1 Lang (T1 L) during alkaline stabilization of wastewater residues. Methods and Results: A bench scale alkaline stabilization model was used to evaluate the inactivation of MS2 seeded into raw sludge simultaneously with HM‐175 or T1 L. Stabilization was performed in triplicate at 28 and 4°C for both viral combinations. During stabilization at 28 and 4°C, MS2 and T1 L concentrations were similar at each time point (t = 0·1, 2, 12 and 24 h). MS2 and HM‐175 concentrations were also similar at each time point during stabilization at 28°C. At 4°C, MS2 and HM‐175 concentrations were not similar at the first two time points (t = 0·1 and 2 h), but were similar at later time points (t = 12 and 24 h). Conclusions: The inactivation rates of T1 L at 4°C and both T1 L and HM‐175 at 28°C were similar to the inactivation rate of MS2 at all time points. At 4°C, MS2 was inactivated at a faster rate during the first two time points (t = 0·1 and 2 h) than HM‐175, but was inactivated similarly at later time points (t = 12 and 24 h). Significance and Impact of the Study: Phages, such as MS2, would be ideal indicators for the presence of enteric viruses in wastewater residues because of their ubiquity, nonpathogenic nature, low cost and time associated with their detection. The findings of this study suggest that MS2 could serve as an indicator for monitoring the persistence of enteric viruses, such as HM‐175 and T1 L, during alkaline stabilization performed at moderate temperatures (28°C), but may not serve as an indicator for HM‐175 at reduced temperature (4°C). The utility of MS2 as an indicator of viral persistence during biosolids treatment should be further evaluated, as the increased efficiency and frequency of pathogen monitoring associated with their use may reduce the potential public health risk associated with biosolids, facilitating a greater acceptance for their land application.

show abstract

“…Indirect transmission by contaminated fomites might also play a role. During the SARS pandemic of 2002-2003, positive RT-PCR results for stool specimens from SARS patients suggested that stools or sewage might be virus sources (10). Our finding of multiple positive stool specimens in this case similarly raises the concern that stool from CO-VID-19 patients might serve as another vehicle for virus transmission.…”

Section: Research Lettersmentioning

confidence: 57%