This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.
Contaminated surfaces lead to first human case of laboratory-acquired cowpox virus
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
Handling contaminated reagents or contact with contaminated surfaces was determined to be the most likely way that the first human case of laboratory-acquired human cowpox virus was transmitted, according to researchers from the CDC.
CDC researchers set out to assess the first known human case of laboratory-acquired human cowpox virus infection in the United States. According to the report, infections have been reported in Europe and Russia and human infections are typically associated with contact with ill cats, rats or zoo animals.
The case was reported in a patient who worked with a non-Orthopoxvirus Chordopoxvirus in a research laboratory. The patient reported never receiving a smallpox vaccination. The infection initially manifested as an ulcerated lesion on a finger. The confirmation of cowpox was made after the lesion went away.
To investigate, the CDC received frozen biopsy tissue and serum specimens that were tested for non-variola virus Orhopoxviruses, vaccinia virus, cowpox virus and non-Orthopoxvirus Chordopoxvirus. The laboratory provided 32 virus samples and nine cell culture stocks for testing. The CDC also obtained 20 environmental samples by swabbing surfaces that may have been exposed to the virus. All of the laboratory personnel were interviewed and all laboratory notebooks were reviewed.
Through genome sequencing, researchers found a strain of cowpox stored in the research laboratory’s freezer. In addition, cowpox contamination was found in six other virus stocks. Lastly, the investigators found Orthopoxvirus DNA in three of the 20 environmental swabs taken from laboratory surfaces.
“Clinicians and health care professionals should be attentive to the potential of Orthopoxvirus infection when examining patients with a vesiculo-pustular rash or lesion, especially if the patient works in a laboratory with poxviruses,” the researchers concluded. “Occupational exposures are important to consider when a laboratory worker presents with an unexplained illness.”
References:
McCollum AM. J Infect Dis. 2012;206:63-68.
Disclosure:
The researchers report no relevant financial disclosures.