Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35190799›Full record

ReviewClinical infection in practice2022

Duration of viable SARS-CoV-2 shedding from respiratory tract in different human hosts and its impact on isolation discontinuation polices revision; a narrative review.

Mohammed Qutub, Yasser Aldabbagh, Fahtima Mehdawi, Abdullah Alraddadi, Mohanna Alhomsy, Abdulaziz Alnahdi, Majed Fakeeh, Abdullah Maghrabi, Meshari Alwagdani, Nezar Bahabri

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical infection in practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mohammed QutubDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Yasser AldabbaghAdult Infectious Diseases division, Department of Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Fahtima MehdawiDepartment of Medicine, Doctor Soliman Fakeeh Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Abdullah AlraddadiDepartment of Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Mohanna AlhomsyDepartment of Critical Care, Suliman Al Habeeb Medical Group, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Abdulaziz AlnahdiDepartment of Medicine, Doctor Soliman Fakeeh Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Majed FakeehDepartment of Medicine, Doctor Soliman Fakeeh Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Abdullah MaghrabiDepartment of Medicine, Doctor Soliman Fakeeh Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Meshari AlwagdaniDepartment of Medicine, Doctor Soliman Fakeeh Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Nezar BahabriDepartment of Medicine, Doctor Samir Abbas Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Soliman Fakeeh Hospital · SAKing Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe duration of viable viral shedding is important to be defined in regards of viral transmission in SARS-CoV-2 infection with the backdrop of the current worldwide effort for revising isolation polices and establishing the duration of infectiousness.

methodsIn this review we searched databases including Medline and google scholar for research articles published between January 2020 and January 2022. We included case reports, case series, cross sectional, cohort, and randomized control trials that reported the duration of shedding of viable SARS-CoV-2 virus. After evaluating the criteria for inclusion, 32 articles (2721 patients) were included.

resultThis review showed that the median for the last day of successful viral isolation was 11 (8.5-14.5 95% CI) , 20 (9.0-57.5 95 %CI), 20 (9.0-103 95 %CI) for the general population, critical patients and immunocompromised individuals, respectively, with significant association between prolonged viral shedding, disease severity (P-Value 0.024) and immunosuppressive status (P-Value 0.023).The corresponding higher cutoff of CTv to culturable virus ranged between 26.25 and 34.00 (95% confidence interval) with median of 30.5, and higher values were observed when critical (25.0-37.37 95 %CI) and immunocompromised patients (20.0-37.82 95 %CI) have been excluded, this deviation did not represent a statistical significance (P-Value 0.997 and 0.888) respectively.

conclusionOur review highlights that repeating SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA test solely in recovering patients has no importance in determining infectivity and emphasizes the individualization of de-isolation decisions based on the host factors and a combined symptom and testing-based approaches with the later benefiting most of correlation with recently introduced rapid antigen test. Our finding in the review also opposes the most recent CDC Guidance on shortening isolation duration in term of the last days of viable transmissible virus, therefore caution should be considered when revising such protocols.

Indexed as

COVID-19CTv, Cycle thresholdvalueCycle threshold valueIsolationPCRRAT, Rapid antigen testRT-PCR, Reverse transcription polymerase chain reactionTransmissionViral culture

Identifiers

PMID35190799
PMCPMC8848577
OpenAlexW4213379143

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.