ArticleEmerging microbes & infections2023
A comparative study on the persistence and viability of SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and omicron variant on artificially contaminated surfaces: the role of fomites.
Article in Emerging microbes & infections, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of high-throughput screening viral titration assay: Proof of concept through two surrogate viruses of human pathogens.Biology methods & protocols · 2025Article
- Inactivation of Pseudovirus Expressing the D614G Spike Protein Mutation using Nitric Oxide-Plasma Activated Water.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Indirect transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been investigated but it is still not completely understood. The present study aimed to compare the persistence and viability of the lineage B.1 and omicron BA.1 subvariant in five daily-use materials to evaluate the role of fomites as a possible source of infection. Artificial contamination was performed in the first set of materials, ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), cardboard, polystyrene, aluminium, and plastic. Further surfaces using BA.1 (glass, plexiglass, cotton, polyester, and tetrapak) were conducted. The persistence, viability of Vero E6 cell cultures and the residual infectivity of the two lineages were evaluated over 5 days. The results showed different stabilities between the tested matrices. In cotton and polyester, the RNA was undetectable in 24 and 48h post-contamination (p.c.), respectively, and the virus was not viable within 30 min, while in the other surfaces, both lineages, RNA was detectable until 120h p.c. A rapid decay of the viral load was revealed on cardboard, mostly for the omicron variant. Furthermore, on all the materials, longer stability of BA.1 was demonstrated, but showing a less intense CPE than the wild-type. EVA was the material that was able to better sustain virus stability as the virus developed CPE up to 72h p.c. In conclusion, the potential spread of SARS-CoV-2 through fomites is conceivable, albeit it is difficult to establish the real capacity to infect people. Nevertheless, thise information is fundamental to adopting the appropriate measures to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and its variants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.