Key result
River water samples showed high prevalence of enteric viruses (76.56% HAV, 56.25% Rotavirus, 51.56% Enterovirus, 25% HEV), whereas only 0.3% of drinking water samples contained enterovirus RNA.
Cross-Sectional (n=730)
No
A rapid and sensitive multiplex nested RT-PCR protocol successfully detected high prevalence of enteric viruses in river water, while confirming their absence in purified drinking water in Pune, India.
Supports drinking water safety in Pune; leaves open need for wider enteric virus surveillance in surface waters.
AIMS: The prevalence of enteric viruses in drinking and river water samples collected from Pune, India was assessed. During an outbreak of HEV in a small town near pune, water samples were screened for enteric viruses. METHODS AND RESULTS: The water samples were subjected to adsorption-elution-based virus concentration protocol followed by multiplex nested PCR. Among 64 Mutha river samples, 49 (76.56%) were positive for Hepatitis A Virus, 36 (56.25%) were positive for Rotavirus, 33 (51.56%) were positive for Enterovirus and 16 (25%) were positive for Hepatitis E Virus RNA. Only enterovirus RNA was detected in 2/662 (0.3%) drinking water samples, and the samples from the city's water reservoir tested negative for all four viruses. HEV RNA was detected in three out of four river water samples during HEV outbreak and partial sequences from patients and water sample were identical. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests absence of enteric viruses both in the source and in the purified water samples from Pune city, not allowing evaluation of the purification system and documents high prevalence of enteric viruses in river water, posing threat to the community. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The rapid, sensitive and relatively inexpensive protocol developed for virological evaluation of water seems extremely useful and should be adapted for evaluating viral contamination of water for human consumption. This will lead to development of adequate control measures thereby reducing disease burden because of enteric viruses.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Verma et al. (2009) conducted a cross-sectional in Enteric viral contamination of water (n=730). River water vs. Drinking water was evaluated on Presence of enteric viruses (HAV, Rotavirus, Enterovirus, HEV). River water samples showed high prevalence of enteric viruses (76.56% HAV, 56.25% Rotavirus, 51.56% Enterovirus, 25% HEV), whereas only 0.3% of drinking water samples contained enterovirus RNA.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: