Positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA recurs repeatedly in a case recovered from COVID-19: dynamic results from 108 days of follow-up

Potential long-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on the pulmonary vasculature: Multilayered cross-talks in the setting of coinfections and comorbidities

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its sublineages pose a new challenge to healthcare systems worldwide due to its ability to efficiently spread in immunized populations and its resistance to currently available therapies. COVID-19, although targeting primarily the respiratory system, is also now well established that later affects every organ in the body. Most importantly, despite the available therapy and vaccine-elicited protection, the long-term consequences of viral infection in breakthrough and asymptomatic individuals are areas of concern. In the past two years, investigators accumulated evidence on how the virus triggers our immune system and the molecular signals involved in the cross-talk between immune cells and structural cells in the pulmonary vasculature to drive pathological lung complications such as endothelial dysfunction and thrombosis. In the review, we emphasize recent updates on the pathophysiological inflammatory and immune responses associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection and their potential long-term consequences that may consequently lead to the development of pulmonary vascular diseases.

Clinical and epidemiological features of patients with COVID-19 reinfection: a systematic review

Recurrent positivity in a patient with COVID-19 may be due to various reasons, not necessarily reinfection. There is concern about the occurrence frequency of reinfection. Five databases and a preprint/preprint repository were searched. All case reports, case series, and observational studies were included. Bias was assessed for each study with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale tool and reported according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA-2020). After eligibility, 77 studies were included for qualitative synthesis (52 case reports, 21 case series, and four case-controls; 1131 patients included). Of these, 16 studies described a second contact with the SARS-CoV-2 positive case, five studies described healthcare profession-related infection, ten studies described that the source of reinfection was likely to be from the community, one study described travel-related infection, nine studies described vulnerability-related infection due to comorbidity. The mean number of days from discharge or negative test to reinfection ranged from 23.3 to 57.6 days across the different included studies. The risk of bias for all case report/series studies was moderate/high. For observational studies, the risk of bias was low. Reinfection of patients with COVID-19 occurs between the first and second month after the first infection, but beyond, and 90 days have been proposed as a point to begin to consider it. The main factor for reinfection is contact with COVID-19 positive cases.

Current utilization of interferon alpha for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019: A comprehensive review

Recent studies have identified an association between perturbed type I interferon (IFN) responses and the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). IFNα intervention may normalize the dysregulated innate immunity of COVID-19. However, details regarding its utilization and therapeutic evidence have yet to be systematically evaluated. The aim of this comprehensive review was to summarize the current utilization of IFNα for COVID-19 treatment and to explore the evidence on safety and efficacy. A comprehensive review of clinical studies in the literature prior to December 1st_, 2021, was performed to identify the current utilization of IFNα, which included details on the route of administration, the number of patients who received the treatment, the severity at the initiation of treatment, age range, the time from the onset of symptoms to treatment, dose, frequency, and duration as well as safety and efficacy. Encouragingly, no evidence was found against the safety of IFNα treatment for COVID-19. Early intervention, either within five days from the onset of symptoms or at hospital admission, confers better clinical outcomes, whereas late intervention may result in prolonged hospitalization.

The mystery of COVID-19 reinfections: A global systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As the COVID-19 pandemic rages on, reports on disparities in vaccine roll out alongside COVID-19 reinfection have been emerging. We conducted a systematic review to assess the determinants and disease spectrum of COVID-19 reinfection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search covering relevant databases was conducted for observational studies reporting Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) confirmed infection and reinfection cases. A quality assessment tool developed by the National Institute of Health (NIH) for the assessment of case series was utilized. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3 for pooled proportions of findings in first infection and reinfection with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Eighty-one studies reporting 577 cases were included from 22 countries. The mean age of patients was 46.2 ± 18.9 years and 179 (31.0%) cases of comorbidities were reported. The average time duration between first infection and reinfection was 63.6 ± 48.9 days. During first infection and reinfection, fever was the most common symptom (41.4% and 36.4%, respectively) whilst anti-viral therapy was the most common treatment regimen administered (44.5% and 43.0%, respectively). Comparable odds of symptomatic presentation and management were reported for the two infections. However, a higher Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission rate was observed in reinfection compared to first infection (10 vs 3). Ten deaths were reported with respiratory failure being the most common cause of death (7/10 deaths).

CONCLUSION

Our findings support immunization practices given increased ICU admissions and mortality in reinfections. Our cohort serves as a guide for clinicians and authorities in devising an optimal strategy for controlling the pandemic. (249 words).

How strong is the evidence that it is possible to get SARS-CoV-2 twice? A systematic review

With a large number of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) patients being discharged from hospital with negative test results for SARS-CoV-2, it has been reported that several recovered cases tested positive after discharge (re-positive, RP). This finding has raised several important questions for this novel coronavirus and Covid-19 disease. In this review, we have discussed several important questions, including: (1) Can the virus re-infect recovered individuals? (2) What are the possible causes of the re-positive reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test in recovered patients? (3) What are the implications of these re-positive cases concerning the spread of the virus? Understanding how recovery from Covid-19 confers immunity to decrease the risk of re-infection is needed to inform current efforts to safely scale back population-based interventions, such as physical distancing. We have also described what is currently known about the immune response to Covid-19, highlighted key gaps in knowledge, and identified opportunities for future research. Overall, the quality of the evidence is poor and we describe the features that should be described for future cases.

Prolonged presence of replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 in mildly symptomatic individuals: A report of two cases

It has been estimated that individuals with COVID-19 can shed replication-competent virus up to a maximum of 20 days after initiation of symptoms. The majority of studies that addressed this situation involved hospitalized individuals and those with severe disease. Studies to address the possible presence of SARS-CoV-2 during the different phases of COVID-19 disease in mildly infected individuals, and utilization of viral culture techniques to identify replication-competent viruses, have been limited. This report describes two patients with mild forms of the disease who shed replication-competent virus for 24 and 37 days, respectively, after symptom onset.

CT imaging research progress in 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia

The highly contagious novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) broke out at the end of 2019 and has lasted for nearly one year, and the pandemic is still rampant around the world. The diagnosis of COVID-19 is on the basis of the combination of epidemiological history, clinical symptoms, and laboratory and imaging examinations. Among them, imaging examination is of importance in the diagnosis of patients with suspected clinical cases, the investigation of asymptomatic infections and family clustering, the judgment of patient recovery, rediagnosis after disease recurrence, and prognosis prediction. This article reviews the research progress of CT imaging examination in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Recurrence, Reactivation, or Inflammatory Rebound of SARS-CoV-2 Infection With Acute Vestibular Symptoms: A Case Report and Revision of Literature

A case of recurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with neurovestibular symptoms was reported. In March 2020, a physician working in an Italian pediatric hospital had flu-like symptoms with anosmia and dysgeusia, and following a reverse transcription PCR (RT/PCR) test with a nasopharyngeal swab tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. After home quarantine, 21 days from the beginning of the symptoms, the patient tested negative in two subsequent swabs and was declared healed and readmitted to work. Serological testing showed a low level of immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody title and absence of immunoglobulin M (IgM). However, 2 weeks later, before resuming work, the patient complained of acute vestibular syndrome, and the RT/PCR test with mucosal swab turned positive. On the basis of the literature examined and reviewed for recurrence cases and vestibular symptoms during COVID-19, to our knowledge this case is the first case of recurrence with vestibular impairment as a neurological symptom, and we defined it as probably a viral reactivation. The PCR retest positivity cannot differentiate re-infectivity, relapse, and dead-viral RNA detection. Serological antibody testing and viral genome sequencing could be always performed in recurrence cases.

Sewage Systems Surveillance for SARS-CoV-2: Identification of Knowledge Gaps, Emerging Threats, and Future Research Needs

The etiological agent for novel coronavirus (COVID-19, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), not only affects the human respiratory system, but also the gastrointestinal tract resulting in gastrointestinal manifestations. The high rate of asymptomatic infected individuals has challenged the estimation of infection spread based on patients' surveillance, and thus alternative approaches such as wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) have been proposed. Accordingly, the number of publications on this topic has increased substantially. The present systematic review thus aimed at providing state-of-the-knowledge on the occurrence and existing methods for sampling procedures, detection/quantification of SARS-CoV-2 in sewage samples, as well as anticipating challenges and providing future research direction to improve the current scientific knowledge. Articles were collected from three scientific databases. Only studies reporting measurements of virus in stool, urine, and wastewater samples were included. Results showed that improving the scientific community's understanding in these avenues is essential if we are to develop appropriate policy and management tools to address this pandemic pointing particularly towards WBE as a new paradigm in public health. It was also evident that standardized protocols are needed to ensure reproducibility and comparability of outcomes. Areas that require the most improvements are sampling procedures, concentration/enrichment, detection, and quantification of virus in wastewater, as well as positive controls. Results also showed that selecting the most accurate population estimation method for WBE studies is still a challenge. While the number of people infected in an area could be approximately estimated based on quantities of virus found in wastewater, these estimates should be cross-checked by other sources of information to draw a more comprehensive conclusion. Finally, wastewater surveillance can be useful as an early warning tool, a management tool, and/or a way for investigating vaccination efficacy and spread of new variants.

Sewage Systems Surveillance for SARS-CoV-2: Identification of Knowledge Gaps, Emerging Threats, and Future Research Needs

The etiological agent for novel coronavirus (COVID-19, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), not only affects the human respiratory system, but also the gastrointestinal tract resulting in gastrointestinal manifestations. The high rate of asymptomatic infected individuals has challenged the estimation of infection spread based on patients' surveillance, and thus alternative approaches such as wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) have been proposed. Accordingly, the number of publications on this topic has increased substantially. The present systematic review thus aimed at providing state-of-the-knowledge on the occurrence and existing methods for sampling procedures, detection/quantification of SARS-CoV-2 in sewage samples, as well as anticipating challenges and providing future research direction to improve the current scientific knowledge. Articles were collected from three scientific databases. Only studies reporting measurements of virus in stool, urine, and wastewater samples were included. Results showed that improving the scientific community's understanding in these avenues is essential if we are to develop appropriate policy and management tools to address this pandemic pointing particularly towards WBE as a new paradigm in public health. It was also evident that standardized protocols are needed to ensure reproducibility and comparability of outcomes. Areas that require the most improvements are sampling procedures, concentration/enrichment, detection, and quantification of virus in wastewater, as well as positive controls. Results also showed that selecting the most accurate population estimation method for WBE studies is still a challenge. While the number of people infected in an area could be approximately estimated based on quantities of virus found in wastewater, these estimates should be cross-checked by other sources of information to draw a more comprehensive conclusion. Finally, wastewater surveillance can be useful as an early warning tool, a management tool, and/or a way for investigating vaccination efficacy and spread of new variants.

Conundrum of re-positive COVID-19 cases: A systematic review of case reports and case series

Background

The systematic review was conducted to summarize and synthesize evidence from all available case series and case reports published on re-positive COVID-19 cases.

Methods

The systematic review was registered with Prospero (CRD42020210446). PRISMA guidelines were followed for conducting the systematic review. Inclusion criteria for studies included case reports and case series which have documented cases of positive reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) after a period of clinical improvement or a negative RT-PCR report. Reviews, opinions, and animal studies were excluded. Methodological quality was assessed using the modified Murad scale.

Results

A total of 30 case reports/case series were included in the study, wherein a total of 219 cases were included. In re-positive cases, the age range varied from 10 months to 91 years. The pooled proportion of positive cases after follow-up using random-effects was 12% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 09%-15%). Among the re-positives, a total of 57 cases (26%) had comorbidities. A total of 51 (23.3%) and 17 (7.8%) re-positive cases had been treated with antivirals and corticosteroids, respectively. Only a few studies have confirmed the presence of antibodies after the first episode. Studies that included contact tracing of re-positives did not find any positive cases among close contacts of re-positive cases.

Conclusion

The systemic review found that reinfection is a possibility within 123 days of a negative RT-PCR test in a small number of cases of COVID-19. This has wider ramifications in framing clinical, preventive, and public health policy guidelines.

Cardio-Pulmonary Sequelae in Recovered COVID-19 Patients: Considerations for Primary Care

Background:

Current literature lacks characterization of the post-recovery sequelae among COVID-19 patients. This review characterizes the course of clinical, laboratory, radiological findings during the primary infection period, and the complications post-recovery. Primary care findings are presented for long-COVID care.

Methods:

Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, 4 databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Scopus) through December 5, 2020, using the keywords “COVID-19 and/or recovered and/or cardiovascular and/or long-term and/or sequelae and/or sub-acute and/or complication.” We included published peer-reviewed case reports, case series, and cross-sectional studies providing the clinical course of COVID-19 infection, and cardiopulmonary complications of patients who recovered from COVID-19, while making healthcare considerations for primary care workers.

Results:

We identified 29 studies across 9 countries including 37.9% Chinese and 24.1% U.S. studies, comprising 655 patients (Mean Age = 45) with various ethnical backgrounds including Asian and European. Based on the WHO COVID-19 severity classification scale, initial disease severity was mild for 377 patients and severe for 52 patients. Treatments during primary infection included corticosteroids, oxygen support, and antivirals. The mean value (in days) for complication onset after acute recovery was 28 days. Complete blood counts and RT-PCR tests were the most common laboratory results described. In 22 of the studies, patients showed signs of clinical improvement and were prescribed medications such as anticoagulants or corticosteroids.

Conclusion:

Post-recovery infectious complications are common in long-COVID-19 patients ranging from mild infections to life-threatening conditions. International thoracic and cardiovascular societies need to develop guidelines for patients recovering from COVID-19 pneumonia, while focused patient care by the primary care physician is crucial to curb preventable adverse events. Recommendations for real-time and lab-quality diagnostic tests are warranted to establish point-of-care testing, detect early complications, and provide timely treatment.

Reinfection or Reactivation of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2: A Systematic Review

As the pandemic continues, individuals with re-detectable positive (RP) SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA among recovered COVID-19 patients have raised public health concerns. It is imperative to investigate whether the cases with re-detectable positive (RP) SARS-CoV-2 might cause severe infection to the vulnerable population. In this work, we conducted a systematic review of recent literature to investigate reactivation and reinfection among the discharged COVID-19 patients that are found positive again. Our study, consisting more than a total of 113,715 patients, indicates that the RP-SARS-CoV-2 scenario occurs plausibly due to reactivation, reinfection, viral shedding, or testing errors. Nonetheless, we observe that previously infected individuals have significantly lower risk of being infected for the second time, indicating that reactivation or reinfection of SARS-CoV-2 likely have relatively less impact in the general population than the primary infection.

A systematic review on the recurrence of SARS-CoV-2 virus: frequency, risk factors, and possible explanations

BACKGROUND

Since late 2019, SARS-CoV-2 which leads to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has caused thousands of deaths. There are some pieces of evidence that SARS-CoV-2 genome could be re-detectable in recovered patients.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review in the PubMed/Medline database to address the risk of SARS-CoV-2 recurrence. The last update was for 20 November 2020. Among the 1178 initially found articles, 66 met the inclusion criteria and were considered.

FINDINGS

In total, 1128 patients with at least one-time recurrence of SARS-CoV-2 were included. Recurrence rate has been reported between 2.3% and 21.4% in cohort studies, within a mean of 20 (ranged 1-98) days after discharge; younger patients are being affected more. Following the second course of disease, the disease severity decreased or remained unchanged in 97.3% while it increased in 2.6%. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM were positive in 11-95% and 58.8-100%, respectively. Based on the literature, three possibilities include reactivation of previous disease, reinfection with the same virus, and false negative, which have been discussed in details.

CONCLUSION

There is a relatively notable risk of disease recurrence in previously recovered patients, even those who are immunised against the virus. More studies are required to clarify the underlying cause of this phenomenon.

Duration of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infectivity: When Is It Safe to Discontinue Isolation?

Defining the duration of infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 has major implications for public health and infection control practice in healthcare facilities. Early in the pandemic, most hospitals required two negative RT-PCR tests before discontinuing isolation in patients with Covid-19. Many patients, however, have persistently positive RT-PCR tests for weeks to months following clinical recovery and multiple studies now indicate that persistently positive RT-PCRs generally do not reflect replication-competent virus. SARS-CoV-2 appears to be most contagious around the time of symptom onset and infectivity rapidly decreases thereafter to near-zero after about 10 days in mild-moderately ill patients and 15 days in severely-critically ill and immunocompromised patients. The longest interval associated with replication-competent virus thus far is 20 days from symptom onset. This review summarizes evidence-to-date on the duration of infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 and how this has informed evolving public health recommendations on when it is safe to discontinue isolation precautions.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of discharged COVID-19 patients retesting positive for RT-PCR

BACKGROUND

With the increased number of patients discharged after having COVID-19, more and more studies have reported cases whose retesting was positive (RP) during the convalescent period, which brings a new public health challenge to the world.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang and VIP from December 1, 2019 to December 31, 2020. The included studies were assessed using JBI critical appraisal tools and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The RP rate of discharge patients was analyzed by a meta-analysis. We adhered to PRISMA reporting guideline.

FINDINGS

We have included 117 studies with 2669 RP participants after discharge. The methodological quality of 66 case reports were low to high, 42 case series and 3 cohort study were moderate to high, 3 case-control studies were moderate and 3 cross-sectional studies were low to moderate. The clinical manifestations of most RP patients were mild or asymptomatic, and CT imaging and laboratory examinations were usually normal. The existing risk factors suggest that more attention should be paid to sever patients, elderly patients, and patients with co-morbidities. The summary RP rate was 12·2% (95% CI 10·6-13·7) with high heterogeneity (I²  = 85%).

INTERPRETATION

To date, the causes and risk factors of RP result in discharged patients are not fully understood. High-quality etiological and clinical studies are needed to investigate these issues to further help us to make strategies to control and prevent its occurrence.

Is recurrence possible in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)? Case series and systematic review of literature

Can a patient diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) be infected again? This question is still unsolved. We tried to analyze local and literature cases with a positive respiratory swab after recovery. We collected data from symptomatic patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Italian Umbria Region that, after recovery, were again positive for SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory tract specimens. Samples were also assessed for infectivity in vitro. A systematic review of similar cases reported in the literature was performed. The study population was composed of 9 patients during a 4-month study period. Among the new positive samples, six were inoculated in Vero-E6 cells and showed no growth and negative molecular test in culture supernatants. All patients were positive for IgG against SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein and/or S protein. Conducting a review of the literature, 1350 similar cases have been found. The presumptive reactivation occurred in 34.5 days on average (standard deviation, SD, 18.7 days) after COVID-19 onset, when the 5.6% of patients presented fever and the 27.6% symptoms. The outcome was favorable in 96.7% of patients, while the 1.1% of them were still hospitalized at the time of data collection and the 2.1% died. Several hypotheses have been formulated to explain new positive respiratory samples after confirmed negativity. According to this study, the phenomenon seems to be due to the prolonged detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA traces in respiratory samples of recovered patients. The failure of the virus to replicate in vitro suggests its inability to replicate in vivo.

Recurrence of SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA in recovered COVID-19 patients: a narrative review

Many studies have shown that re-positive tests for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR in recovered COVID-19 patients are very common. We aim to conduct this review to summarize the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of these patients and discuss the potential explanations for recurrences, the contagiousness of re-detectable positive SARS-CoV-2 virus, and the management of COVID-19 patients after discharge from hospital. The proportion of re-positive tests in discharged COVID-19 patients varied from 2.4 to 69.2% and persisted from 1 to 38 days after discharge, depending on population size, age of patients, and type of specimens. Currently, several causes of re-positive tests for SARS-CoV-2 in recovered COVID-19 patients are suggested, including false-negative, false-positive RT-PCR tests; reactivation; and re-infection with SARS-CoV-2, but the mechanism leading to these re-positive cases is still unclear. The prevention of re-positive testing in discharged patients is a fundamental measure to control the spread of the pandemic. In order to reduce the percentage of false-negative tests prior to discharge, we recommend performing more than two tests, according to the standard sampling and microbiological assay protocol. In addition, specimens should be collected from multiple body parts if possible, to identify SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA before discharge. Further studies should be conducted to develop novel assays that target a crucial region of the RNA genome in order to improve its sensitivity and specificity.

Prevalence and outcomes of re-positive nucleic acid tests in discharged COVID-19 patients

The prevalence and outcomes of patients who had re-activation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after discharge remain poorly understood. We included 126 consecutively confirmed cases of COVID-19 with 2-month follow-up data after discharge in this retrospective study. The upper respiratory specimen using a reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction test of three patients (71 years [60–76]) were positive within 11–20 days after their discharge, with an event rate of 19.8 (95%CI 2.60–42.1) per 1,000,000 patient-days. Moreover, all re-positive patients were asymptomatic. Our findings suggest that few recovered patients may still be virus carriers even after reaching the discharge criteria.