The clinical characteristic of eight patients of COVID-19 with positive RT-PCR test after discharge

The performance of a lateral flow SARS-CoV-2 antibody assay and semi-autonomous SARS-CoV-2 antisense and sense RNA fluorescence in situ hybridization assay in a prospective cohort pilot study within a Dutch military population

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, diagnostic testing was not accessible for mildly ill or asymptomatic individuals. Military operational circumstances exclude the usage of reference laboratory tests. For that reason, at the beginning of the pandemic alternative test methods were needed in order to gain insight into the SARS-CoV-2 status of military personnel. The objectives of this study are to assess whether SARS-CoV-2 antibody rapid lateral flow assay (LFA) in combination with semi-autonomous SARS-CoV-2 antisense and sense genomic RNA fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) could establish disease status in military personnel in a fieldable setting, and to assess how this combination performed and to determine which type of sample performed best. A proof of concept sub-study regarding the SARS-CoV-2 application of the fieldable Biotrack-MED® FISH analyzer, a semi-autonomous multi-sample filter cytometer, preceded this observational prospective cohort pilot study. Dutch military personnel were included in the 26 June 2020-11 May 2021 period. Blood, nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs and saliva were tested at days 0 and 14. SPSS version 25 descriptive statistics and Cohen's kappa assessed agreement between test methods. Both the sensitivity and specificity of the field tests were calculated with ELISA and PCR as reference. Saliva appeared to be the preferred sample type for FISH, where blood was not useful. FISH analysis and LFA results had a concordance of 42% for testing negative, 30% for recovered from infection, 22% for ongoing-and 58% for acute infection in a reference laboratory lab result outcome (RT-PCR or ELISA respectively). The LFA results on serum and full blood corresponded with the ELISA-obtained results (kappa of 0.61 and 0.63 respectively at day 0 and 0.81 and 0.77 respectively at day 14). LFA (full blood-serum), FISH and RT-PCR on saliva did not reach the 90% sensitivity level advised by WHO, with 64-54, 38 and 71% at day 0 and 80-79, 53 and 24% at day 14 respectively.

Benefit of Nasal Douche in COVID-19 Patients with Recurrence of Positive SARS-CoV-2 Viral RNA

Purpose

The purpose was to review relevant clinical data and formulate recommendations supporting the use of saline as a simple rinse for an early reassuring intervention to reduce the occurrence of re-positive COVID-19 patients.

Methods

We conducted a single-centre retrospective cohort study, which enrolled patients with confirmed re-testing positive COVID-19 during 7-60 days after discharge from Third People's Hospital of Shenzhen. By one-to-two propensity score matching for age and sex, the control group of those not re-testing positive during the same period served as matched control.

Results

A total of 223 patients were included in our study, 94 in re-positive group and 129 in non-re-positive group. The result shows that the rates of nasal douche treatment in the non-re-positive group were considerably higher than that of the re-positive group. And the Ct value of nasal douche group increased faster than that of non-nasal douche group after the Ct value reaching ≥35. Further analysis revealed that the higher the Ct value at the time of readmission, the shorter the time of average Ct values to reach ≥35.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that nasal douche is beneficial to shorten the time of virus nucleic acid turning negative, thereby reducing the incidence of re-positive. The prevention and control of epidemics focuses on re-positive patients with Ct values <35.

Multi-omics blood atlas reveals unique features of immune and platelet responses to SARS-CoV-2 Omicron breakthrough infection

Although host responses to the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain are well described, those to the new Omicron variants are less resolved. We profiled the clinical phenomes, transcriptomes, proteomes, metabolomes, and immune repertoires of >1,000 blood cell or plasma specimens from SARS-CoV-2 Omicron patients. Using in-depth integrated multi-omics, we dissected the host response dynamics during multiple disease phases to reveal the molecular and cellular landscapes in the blood. Specifically, we detected enhanced interferon-mediated antiviral signatures of platelets in Omicron-infected patients, and platelets preferentially formed widespread aggregates with leukocytes to modulate immune cell functions. In addition, patients who were re-tested positive for viral RNA showed marked reductions in B cell receptor clones, antibody generation, and neutralizing capacity against Omicron. Finally, we developed a machine learning model that accurately predicted the probability of re-positivity in Omicron patients. Our study may inspire a paradigm shift in studying systemic diseases and emerging public health concerns.

Hospital readmissions and emergency department re-presentation of COVID-19 patients: a systematic review

Objective.

To characterize the frequency, causes, and predictors of readmissions of COVID-19 patients after discharge from heath facilities or emergency departments, interventions used to reduce readmissions, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients discharged from such settings.

Methods.

We performed a systematic review for case series and observational studies published between January 2020 and April 2021 in PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and MedRxiv, reporting the frequency, causes, or risk factors for readmission of COVID-19 survivors/patients. We conducted a narrative synthesis and assessed the methodological quality using the JBI critical appraisal checklist.

Results.

We identified 44 studies including data from 10 countries. The overall 30-day median readmission rate was 7.1%. Readmissions varied with the length of follow-up, occurring <10.5%, <14.5%, <21.5%, and <30%, respectively, for 10, 30, 60, and 253 days following discharge. Among those followed up for 30 and 60 days, the median time from discharge to readmission was 3 days and 8–11 days, respectively. The significant risk factor associated with readmission was having shorter length of stay, and the important causes included respiratory or thromboembolic events and chronic illnesses. Emergency department re-presentation was >20% in four studies. Risk factors associated with mortality were male gender, advanced age, and comorbidities.

Conclusions.

Readmission of COVID-19 survivors is frequent, and post-discharge mortality is significant in specific populations. There is an urgent need to further examine underlying reasons for early readmission and to prevent additional readmissions and adverse outcomes in COVID-19 survivors.

The prevalence of adaptive immunity to COVID-19 and reinfection after recovery - a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis

This study aims to estimate the prevalence and longevity of detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and T and B memory cells after recovery. In addition, the prevalence of COVID-19 reinfection and the preventive efficacy of previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 were investigated. A synthesis of existing research was conducted. The Cochrane Library, the China Academic Journals Full Text Database, PubMed, and Scopus, and preprint servers were searched for studies conducted between 1 January 2020 to 1 April 2021. Included studies were assessed for methodological quality and pooled estimates of relevant outcomes were obtained in a meta-analysis using a bias adjusted synthesis method. Proportions were synthesized with the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation and binary outcomes using the odds ratio (OR). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² and Cochran's Q statistics and publication bias was assessed using Doi plots. Fifty-four studies from 18 countries, with around 12,000,000 individuals, followed up to 8 months after recovery, were included. At 6-8 months after recovery, the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 specific immunological memory remained high; IgG - 90.4% (95%CI 72.2-99.9, I² = 89.0%), CD4+ - 91.7% (95%CI 78.2-97.1y), and memory B cells 80.6% (95%CI 65.0-90.2) and the pooled prevalence of reinfection was 0.2% (95%CI 0.0-0.7, I² = 98.8). Individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 had an 81% reduction in odds of a reinfection (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.1-0.3, I² = 90.5%). Around 90% of recovered individuals had evidence of immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2, at 6-8 months after recovery and had a low risk of reinfection.RegistrationPROSPERO: CRD42020201234.

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.

Return visit characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive cases in a pediatric emergency department

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate return visits to the pediatric emergency department (ED) for children who were detected to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction (PCR).

METHODS

Between April 2, 2020, and January 20, 2021, children aged 0 to 18 years who were detected to be SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive and discharged from the ED were evaluated. Among them, patients who returned to the ED within 14 days of quarantine were included in the study. For the first presentation and return visit, demographics, clinical findings, laboratory and radiologic investigations, and ward/pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admissions were recorded. Patients were divided into 5 groups according to clinical severity.

RESULTS

Among 575 children who were confirmed to be SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive, 50 (8.6%) of them [median age: 10.4 years (IQR: 4.8-15.2); 26 females] had returned. There was no difference for age, sex, underlying diseases, or symptoms for patients who returned or did not for the first presentation, but the percentage of those from whom laboratory tests were obtained was higher in cases of return visits. For symptomatic cases on the first presentation, the most common reason for return was having additional symptoms. The most common symptoms at the return visit were fever, cough, and sore throat. There was no severe/critical case in terms of clinical severity. Among all cases, 36 (72.0%) patients were discharged from the ED, 13 (26.0%) were observed for 6-8 h and then discharged, and 1 (2.0%) was admitted to the ward; there was no PICU admission or death, respectively.

Epidemiologic characteristics of cases with reinfection, recurrence, and hospital readmission due to COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Recent studies reported that some recovered COVID-19 patients have tested positive for virus nucleic acid again. A systematic search was performed in Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar up to March 6, 2021. The pooled estimation of reinfection, recurrence, and hospital readmission among recovered COVID-19 patients was 3, 133, and 75 per 1000 patients, respectively. The overall estimation of reinfection among males compared to females was greater. The prevalence of recurrence in females compared to males was more common. Also, hospital readmission between sex groups was the same. There is uncertainty about long-term immunity after SARS-Cov-2 infection. Thus, the possibility of reinfection and recurrence after recovery is not unexpected. In addition, there is a probability of hospital readmission due to adverse events of COVID-19 after discharge. However, with mass vaccination of people and using the principles of prevention and appropriate management of the disease, frequent occurrence of the disease can be controlled.

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).

Hospital readmissions and post-discharge all-cause mortality in COVID-19 recovered patients; A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The present study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of one-year hospital readmissions and post-discharge all-cause mortality in recovered COVID-19 patients. Moreover, the country-level prevalence of the outcomes was investigated.

METHODS

An extensive search was performed in Medline (PubMed), Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases until the end of August 3rd, 2021. A manual search was also performed in Google and Google Scholar search engines. Cohort and cross-sectional studies were included. Two independent reviewers screened the papers, collected data, and assessed the risk of bias and level of evidence. Any disagreement was resolved through discussion.

RESULTS

91 articles were included. 48 studies examined hospital readmissions; nine studies assessed post-discharge all-cause mortality, and 34 studies examined both outcomes. Analyses showed that the prevalence of hospital readmissions during the first 30 days, 90 days, and one-year post-discharge were 8.97% (95% CI: 7.44, 10.50), 9.79% (95% CI: 8.37, 11.24), and 10.34% (95% CI: 8.92, 11.77), respectively. The prevalence of post-discharge all-cause mortality during the 30 days, 90 days and one-year post-discharge was 7.87% (95% CI: 2.78, 12.96), 7.63% (95% CI: 4.73, 10.53) and 7.51% (95% CI, 5.30, 9.72), respectively. 30-day hospital readmissions and post-discharge mortality were 8.97% and 7.87%, respectively. The highest prevalence of hospital readmissions was observed in Germany (15.5%), Greece (15.5%), UK (13.5%), Netherlands (11.7%), China (10.8%), USA (10.0%) and Sweden (9.9%). In addition, the highest prevalence of post-discharge all-cause mortality belonged to Italy (12.7%), the UK (11.8%), and Iran (9.2%). Sensitivity analysis showed that the prevalence of one-year hospital readmissions and post-discharge all-cause mortality in high-quality studies were 10.38% and 4.00%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

10.34% of recovered COVID-19 patients required hospital readmissions after discharge. Most cases of hospital readmissions and mortality appear to occur within 30 days after discharge. The one-year post-discharge all-cause mortality rate of COVID-19 patients is 7.87%, and the majority of patients' readmission and mortality happens within the first 30 days post-discharge. Therefore, a 30-day follow-up program and patient tracking system for discharged COVID-19 patients seems necessary.

Evaluation of Reinfection in COVID-19 Patients in the World: A Narrative Review

Background: The evaluation of reinfection and the genetic structure of all human and virus genomes could help to develop programs and protocols for providing services and ultimately to prevent the disease by producing more effective vaccines. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the presence and occurrence of COVID-19 reinfection through a narrative review study. Methods: We searched the Medline (PubMed), Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane library, Ovid, and CINHAL databases. Inclusion criteria included all studies whose main purpose was to provide information about the occurrence or presence of reinfection in patients with COVID-19. An independent samples t test was used to compare the continuous outcomes between the 2 groups. Results: The mean duration of the first episode in the group with mild or moderate COVID-19 was 24.42±1.67 days, and it was 21.80±3.79 days in the group with severe COVID-19. The mean duration of the second episode (reinfection) in patients with mild or moderate form was 15.38 ± 5.57 days, and it was 19.20±2.98 days in patients with severe form. In both episodes, the duration of the disease did not significantly differ between the 2 groups (p=0.484 in the first episode; p=0.675 in the second episode), but the interval to the occurrence of reinfection in patients with the mild or moderate form was significantly longer than those with the severe form (p<0.001). In this instance, the time interval in patients with the mild or moderate form was 36.63±5.71 days while in those with the severe form of the disease it was 29.70±5.65 days. Besides, the genomes of the viruses isolated from the first and second episode were different. Conclusion: According to the results, all patients should be very careful about the severity of the second episode because of the more need for medical interventions for saving the patients. The interval between the first end and the second episode as well as the duration of each episode is highly important for better management of the disease.

Pre-hospital, in-hospital and post-hospital factors associated with sleep quality among COVID-19 survivors 6 months after hospital discharge: cross-sectional survey in five cities in China

BACKGROUND

Understanding factors associated with post-discharge sleep quality among COVID-19 survivors is important for intervention development.

AIMS

This study investigated sleep quality and its correlates among COVID-19 patients 6 months after their most recent hospital discharge.

METHOD

Healthcare providers at hospitals located in five different Chinese cities contacted adult COVID-19 patients discharged between 1 February and 30 March 2020. A total of 199 eligible patients provided verbal informed consent and completed the interview. Using score on the single-item Sleep Quality Scale as the dependent variable, multiple linear regression models were fitted.

RESULTS

Among all participants, 10.1% reported terrible or poor sleep quality, and 26.6% reported fair sleep quality, 26.1% reported worse sleep quality when comparing their current status with the time before COVID-19, and 33.7% were bothered by a sleeping disorder in the past 2 weeks. After adjusting for significant background characteristics, factors associated with sleep quality included witnessing the suffering (adjusted B = -1.15, 95% CI = -1.70, -0.33) or death (adjusted B = -1.55, 95% CI = -2.62, -0.49) of other COVID-19 patients during hospital stay, depressive symptoms (adjusted B = -0.26, 95% CI = -0.31, -0.20), anxiety symptoms (adjusted B = -0.25, 95% CI = -0.33, -0.17), post-traumatic stress disorders (adjusted B = -0.16, 95% CI = -0.22, -0.10) and social support (adjusted B = 0.07, 95% CI = 0.04, 0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 survivors reported poor sleep quality. Interventions and support services to improve sleep quality should be provided to COVID-19 survivors during their hospital stay and after hospital discharge.

Saliva specimen complements anal swab in assessing patients with COVID-19 for discharge from hospital

Since December 2019, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread and threatens public health worldwide. The recurrence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection in patients after discharge from hospital signals a risk of transmission from such patients to the community and challenges the current discharge criteria of COVID-19 patients. A wide range of clinical specimens has been used to detect SARS-CoV-2. However, to date, a consensus has not been reached regarding the most appropriate specimens to use for viral RNA detection in assessing COVID-19 patients for discharge. An anal swab sample was proposed as the standard because of prolonged viral detection. In this retrospective longitudinal study of viral RNA detection in 60 confirmed COVID-19 patients, we used saliva, oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal swab (O/N swab) and anal swab procedures from admission to discharge. The conversion times of saliva and anal swab were longer than that of O/N swab. The conversion time of hyper sensitive-CRP was the shortest and correlated with that of CT scanning and viral detection. Some patients were found to be RNA-positive in saliva while RNA-negative in anal swab while the reverse was true in some other patients, which indicated that false negatives were inevitable if only the anal swab is used for evaluating suitability for discharge. These results indicated that double-checking for viral RNA using multiple and diverse specimens was essential, and saliva could be a candidate to supplement anal swabs to reduce false-negative results and facilitate pandemic control.

Elaboration of a Radiomics Strategy for the Prediction of the Re-positive Cases in the Discharged Patients With COVID-19

Objective: A considerable part of COVID-19 patients were found to be re-positive in the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test after discharge. Early prediction of re-positive COVID-19 cases is of critical importance in determining the isolation period and developing clinical protocols. Materials and Methods: Ninety-one patients discharged from Wanzhou Three Gorges Central Hospital, Chongqing, China, from February 10, 2020 to March 3, 2020 were administered nasopharyngeal swab SARS-CoV-2 tests within 12-14 days, and 50 eligible patients (32 male and 18 female) with completed data were enrolled. Average age was 48 ± 11.5 years. All patients underwent non-enhanced chest CT on admission. A total of 568 radiomics features were extracted from the CT images, and 17 clinical factors were collected based on the medical record. Student's t-test and support vector machine-based recursive feature elimination (SVM-RFE) method were used to determine an optimal subset of features for the discriminative model development. Results: After Student's t-test, 62 radiomics features showed significant inter-group differences (p < 0.05) between the re-positive and negative cases, and none of the clinical features showed significant differences. These significant features were further selected by SVM-RFE algorithm, and a more compact feature subset containing only two radiomics features was finally determined, achieving the best predictive performance with the accuracy and area under the curve of 72.6% and 0.773 for the identification of the re-positive case. Conclusion: The proposed radiomics method has preliminarily shown potential in identifying the re-positive cases among the recovered COVID-19 patients after discharge. More strategies are to be integrated into the current pipeline to improve its precision, and a larger database with multi-clinical enrollment is required to extensively verify its performance.

Case series of COVID-19 patients from the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau Area in China

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a serious infection caused by the new coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The disease was first identified in December 2019 and has caused significant morbidity and mortality worldwide.

AIM

To explore the clinical characteristics and treatments for COVID-19 in the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau Area in China.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the blood cell counts (neutrophils and lymphocytes), blood gas analysis, and thoracic computed tomography changes of patients from Qinghai Province before, during, and after treatment (January 23, 2020 to February 21, 2020). In addition, we summarized and analyzed the information of critical patients. All data were analyzed using SPSS 17.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, United States). The quantitative and count variables are represented as the mean ± SD and n (%), respectively.

RESULTS

The main symptoms and signs of patients with COVID-19 were fever, dry cough, cough with phlegm, difficulty breathing, and respiratory distress with a respiration rate ≥ 30 times/min, finger oxygen saturation ≤ 93% in the resting state, and oxygenation index less than 200 but greater than 100 (after altitude correction). Eighteen patients with COVID-19, of whom three were critical, and the others were in a mild condition, were included. The main manifestations included fever, dry cough, and fatigue. Three patients developed difficulty breathing and had a fever. They were eventually cured and discharged. Adjuvant examinations showed one case with reduced white cell count (6%) (< 4 × 109/L), six with reduced count of lymphocytes (33%) (< 0.8 × 109/L), and one with abnormal blood glucose level. All 18 patients were discharged, and no death occurred.

CONCLUSION

Our findings provide critical insight into assessing the clinical diagnosis and treatment for COVID-19 in the Tibetan plateau area.

Low infectious risk of re-positive COVID-19 patients: a single-center study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the infectiousness of re-positive coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.

METHODS

All nucleic acid testing (NAT) was performed using throat swabs, nasopharyngeal swabs, and anal swabs, which were tested by Fluorescent quantitative realtime PCR. Re-positive cases were defined as a discharged patient who re-tested positive by NAT. Micro-neutralization of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was performed based on the methods for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) viruses. IgM and IgG against the N protein of SARS-CoV-2 were determined by ELISA.

RESULTS

A total 255 (16.04%) of 1590 COVID-19 patients were re-positive. The re-positive cases were more likely to occur in patients in the 20-39 years age group and in patients with disease of moderate severity. Quantitative PCR showed that cycle threshold (Ct) values and viral loads were both far lower than in the hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The viral load in re-positive cases was very low. Viral culture of the samples from re-positive patients showed no cytopathic effect, and NAT of the culture medium of viral cultures all exhibited negative results.

CONCLUSION

The viral load in re-positive cases was very low; patients were not infectious and the risk of human-to-human transmission was extremely low. Discharged COVID-19 patients should undergo home health management for 3 weeks.

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.

Efficacy of systematic coronavirus screening by PCR and viral cultures in addition to triage in limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2 within a hemodialysis unit

BACKGROUND

Patients with end-stage-renal-disease (ESRD) undergoing hemodialysis (HD) represent a vulnerable population for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, due to their intrinsic fragility and increased exposure to the virus. Therefore, applying effective screening strategies and infection control measures is essential to control the spread of the epidemic within hemodialysis centers.

OBJECTIVE

Description and evaluation of the efficacy of systematic screening by rt-PCR and viral cultures, in addition to triage to limit the spread of the epidemic. Evaluation of the performance of these tests using "post-hoc" SARS-CoV-2 serology as a surrogate marker of infection.

METHODS

One hundred and forty-four patients undergoing hemodialysis in the Nephrology-Hemodialysis center of CHU Brugmann, Brussels, benefited from systematic virological screening using viral cultures in asymptomatic patients, or molecular tests (rt-PCR) for symptomatic ones, in addition to general prevention measures. Post-hoc serology was performed in all patients.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight (26.3%) individuals were infected with SARS-CoV-2. Seventeen infected patients (44.7%) were asymptomatic and thus detected by viral culture. Our strategy allowed us to detect and isolate 97.4% of the infected patients, as proven by post-hoc serology. Only one patient, missed by clinical screening and sequential viral cultures, had a positive serology.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of a control and prevention strategy based on a systematic clinical and virological screening showed its effectiveness in limiting (and shortening) the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic within our hemodialysis unit.

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.

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.

Determining the communicable period of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review of the literature, March to September 2020

IntroductionStandard testing for infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is based on RT-PCR tests, but detection of viral genetic material alone does not indicate ongoing infectious potential. The ability to isolate whole virus represents a better proxy for infectivity.AimThe objective of this study was to gain an understanding of the current literature and compare the reported periods of positive SARS-CoV-2 detection from studies that conducted RT-PCR testing in addition to experiments isolating whole virus.MethodsUsing a rapid review approach, studies reporting empirical data on the duration of positive RT-PCR results and/or successful viral isolation following SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans were identified through searches of peer-reviewed and pre-print health sciences literature. Articles were screened for relevance, then data were extracted, analysed, and synthesised.ResultsOf the 160 studies included for qualitative analysis, 84% (n = 135) investigated duration of positive RT-PCR tests only, 5% (n = 8) investigated duration of successful viral isolations, while 11% (n = 17) included measurements on both. There was significant heterogeneity in reported data. There was a prolonged time to viral clearance when deduced from RT-PCR tests compared with viral isolations (median: 26 vs 9 days).DiscussionFindings from this review support a minimum 10-day period of isolation but certain cases where virus was isolated after 10 days were identified. Given the extended time to viral clearance from RT-PCR tests, future research should ensure standard reporting of RT-PCR protocols and results to help inform testing policies aimed at clearance from isolation.

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.

Characteristics of COVID-19 Recurrence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background:

Previous studies reported the recurrence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among discharge patients. This study aimed to examine the characteristic of COVID-19 recurrence cases by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods:

A systematic search was performed in PubMed and Embase and gray literature up to September 19, 2020. A random-effects model was applied to obtain the pooled prevalence of disease recurrence among recovered patients and the prevalence of subjects underlying comorbidity among recurrence cases. The other characteristics were calculated based on the summary data of individual studies.

Results:

A total of 41 studies were included in the final analysis, we have described the epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 recurrence cases. Of 3,644 patients recovering from COVID-19 and being discharged, an estimate of 15% (95% CI, 12% to 19%) patients was re-positive with SARS-CoV-2 during the follow-up. This proportion was 14% (95% CI, 11% to 17%) for China and 31% (95% CI, 26% to 37%) for Korea. Among recurrence cases, it was estimated 39% (95% CI, 31% to 48%) subjects underlying at least one comorbidity. The estimates for times from disease onset to admission, from admission to discharge, and from discharge to RNA positive conversion were 4.8, 16.4, and 10.4 days, respectively.

Conclusion:

This study summarized up-to-date evidence from case reports, case series, and observational studies for the characteristic of COVID-19 recurrence cases after discharge. It is recommended to pay attention to follow-up patients after discharge, even if they have been in discharge quarantine.

Recurrent and More Severe COVID-19 Infection: Two Elderly Case Reports

Although the sensitivity of reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is low in the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), it is the gold standard. Clinical improvement is prioritized in the follow-up of patients with COVID-19 who are followed as possible or definitive cases. Although the priority in the discharge decision is the resolution of complaints, it is also important to see radiological improvement and RT-PCR negativity. A total of 2 of our patients who were hospitalized and treated in our clinic with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were discharged after their complaints were resolved and their treatment was completed. The patients had 2 negative RT-PCR results at discharge. Both of them presented to the hospital with symptoms such as fever, cough, and shortness of breath after the discharge, and both showed positive RT-PCR results. Considering recurrent COVID-19 infection, we aimed to present treatment and the 2 cases we followed.

Clinical characteristics, cause analysis and infectivity of COVID-19 nucleic acid repositive patients: A literature review

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) poses a serious threat to human health and lives. The virus is still spreading throughout the world, and the cumulative number of confirmed cases is increasing. After patients with COVID-19 are treated and discharged, some have repeated clinical symptoms and become positive for nucleic acid tests a second time. Through analysis and review of the existing literature, the proportion of repositive patients in the discharged patient population and their clinical characteristics were systematically described for the first time. Furthermore, an in-depth analysis of the causes of repositive nucleic acid tests and the potential transmission of the disease provides the basis for the management and protection of discharged patients with COVID-19.

Thirty-day readmission rate of COVID-19 patients discharged from a tertiary care university hospital in Turkey: an observational, single-center study

Background

The 30-day readmission rate is an important indicator of patient safety and hospital’s quality performance. In this study, we aimed to find out the 30-day readmission rate of mild and moderate severity COVID-19 patients discharged from a tertiary care university hospital and to demonstrate the possible factors associated with readmission.

Methods

This is an observational, single-center study. Epidemiological and clinical data of patients who were hospitalized with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were retrieved from a research database where patient information was recorded prospectively. Readmission data was sought from the hospital information management system and National Health Record System to detect if the patients were readmitted to any hospital within 30 days of discharge. Adult patients (≥18 years-old) hospitalized in COVID-19 wards with a diagnosis of mild or moderate COVID-19 between March 20, 2020 (when the first case was admitted to our hospital), and April 26, 2020 were included.

Results

From March 26 to May 1, there were 154 mild or moderate severity (non-critical) COVID-19 patients discharged from COVID-19 wards, of which 11 (7.1%) were readmitted The median time of readmission was 8.1 days (IQR=5.2). Two patients (18.1%) were categorized to have mild disease and the remaining 9 (81.9%) as moderate disease. Two patients who were over 65 years of age and had metastatic cancers and hypertension developed sepsis and died in the hospital during the readmission episode. Malignancy (18.7% vs 2.1%, P = 0.04) and hypertension (45.5% vs 14%, P = 0.02) were more common in those who were readmitted.

Conclusions

This is one of the first studies to report on 30-day readmission rate of COVID-19 in the literature. More comprehensive studies are needed to reveal the causes and predictors of COVID-19 readmissions.

Atypical presentations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from onset to readmission

BACKGROUND

To investigate the CT imaging and clinical features of three atypical presentations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), namely (1) asymptomatic, (2) CT imaging-negative, and (3) re-detectable positive (RP), during all disease stages.

METHODS

A consecutive cohort of 79 COVID-19 patients was retrospectively recruited from five independent institutions. For each presentation type, all patients were classified into atypical vs. typical groups (i.e., asymptomatic vs.symptomatic, CT imaging-negative vs. CT imaging-positive, and RP and non-RP,respectively). The chi-square test, Student's t test, and Kruskal-Wallis H test were performed to compare CT imaging and clinical features of atypical vs. typical patients for all three presentation categories.

RESULTS

In our COVID-19 cohort, we found 12.7% asymptomatic patients, 13.9% CT imaging-negative patients, and 8.9% RP patients. The asymptomatic patients had fewer hospitalization days (P=0.043), lower total scores for bilateral lung involvement (P< 0.001), and fewer ground-glass opacities (GGOs) in the peripheral area (P< 0.001) than symptomatic patients. The CT imaging-negative patients were younger (P=0.002), had a higher lymphocyte count (P=0.038), had a higher lymphocyte rate (P=0.008), and had more asymptomatic infections (P=0.002) than the CT imaging-positive patients. The RP patients with moderate COVID-19 had lower total scores of for bilateral lung involvement (P=0.030) and a smaller portion of the left lung affected (P=0.024) than non-RP patients. Compared to their first hospitalization, RP patients had a shorter hospitalization period (P< 0.001) and fewer days from the onset of illness to last RNA negative conversion (P< 0.001) at readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant CT imaging and clinical feature differences were found between atypical and typical COVID-19 patients for all three atypical presentation categories investigated in this study, which may help provide complementary information for the effective management of COVID-19.

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.

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.

Prognostic Value of Serum Procalcitonin in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

This study is aimed at reviewing the published literature on the prognostic role of serum procalcitonin (PCT) in COVID-19 cases.

DATA RETRIEVAL

We systematically reviewed the literature available on PubMed, MEDLINE, LitCovid NLM, and WHO: to assess the utility of PCT in prognosis of coronavirus disease. Scrutiny for eligible studies comprising articles that have evaluated the prognostic utility of PCT and data compilation was undertaken by two separate investigators. Original articles in human subjects reporting the prognostic role of PCT in adult COVID-19 patients were included. The Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool was utilized to assess the strength of evidence. Results were reported as narrative syntheses.

RESULTS

Out of the total 426 citations, 52 articles passed through screening. The quality of evidence and methodology of included studies was overall acceptable. The total sample size of the studies comprised of 15,296 COVID-19-positive subjects. Majority of the studies were from China, i.e., 40 (77%). The PCT cut-off utilized was 0.05 ng/mL by 18 (35%) studies, followed by 0.5 ng/mL by 9 (17.5%). Eighty five percent (n = 44) studies reported statistically significant association (p value < 0.05) between PCT and severity.

CONCLUSION

Procalcitonin appears as a promising prognostic biomarker of COVID-19 progression in conjunction with the clinical context.

HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE

Ahmed S, Jafri L, Hoodbhoy Z, Siddiqui I. Prognostic Value of Serum Procalcitonin in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(1):77-84.

Repositive RT-PCR test in discharged COVID-19 patients during medical isolation observation

Objectives: The epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been researched. However, the prevalence of repositivity by real-time PCR for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains unclear. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted involving 599 discharged patients with COVID-19 in a single medical centre. The clinical features of patients during their hospitalization and 14-day post-discharge quarantine were collected. Results: A total of 122 patients (20.4%) out of 599 patients retested positive after discharge. Specifically, 94 (15.7%) retested positive within 24 h of discharge, and another 28 patients (4.7%) were repositive on day 7 after discharge, although none showed any clinical symptomatic recurrence. Both repositives and non‑repositives have similar patterns of IgG and IgM. Notably, the length of hospitalization of non-repositive patients was longer than that of 24-h repositive patients and 7-day repositive patients. In addition, the length of hospitalization of 24-h repositive patients was shorter than that of 7-day repositive patients, indicating that the length of hospitalization was also a determinant of viral shedding. Conclusion: Our study provides further information for improving the management of recovered and discharged patients, and further studies should be performed to elucidate the infectiveness of individuals with prolonged or RNA repositivity.

Evaluation of re-hospitalized COVID-19 patients in a hospital

PURPOSE

This study intends to investigate the reasons for re-hospitalization, complaints, and prognoses of COVID-19 patients after being discharged.

METHODS

COVID-19 patients who were re-hospitalized at the Sakarya University Training and Research Hospital were examined. Reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), tomography and laboratory results, demographic characteristics, and prognostic results were recorded retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients, including 26 males (43.3%) and 34 females (56.7%), with repeated admissions to the hospital for COVID-19 symptoms, were included in the study with a mean age of 56.9 (± 22.5) (median value = 61, age range = 3-88). The number of days of the second hospitalization was statistically significantly higher (p < 0.05). Patient age and number of days of hospitalization were strongly positively correlated (p < 0.01). A total of 11 patients (18%) had negative results in their first RT-PCR and subsequently tested positive in their second hospitalization. In addition, 10 (17.5%) of the patients who underwent thoracic tomography had unilateral involvement, 34 (59.6%) had bilateral involvement, and 13 (22.8%) had no significant results. Note that 4 (6.6%) of the patients re-hospitalized died in the hospital, while 56 (93.4%) were discharged once more. All of the four patients that died were female with a mean age of 81.5 years.

CONCLUSION

Particularly patients with advanced age and comorbidities should be examined more carefully when discharged; if their complaints are repeated, they should be advised to quickly contact the emergency service.

COVID-19: changing patterns among neurosurgical patients from North India, efficacy of repeat testing, and inpatient prevalence

OBJECTIVE

COVID-19 has affected surgical practice globally. Treating neurosurgical patients with the restrictions imposed by the pandemic is challenging in institutions with shared patient areas. The present study was performed to assess the changing patterns of neurosurgical cases, the efficacy of repeated testing before surgery, and the prevalence of COVID-19 in asymptomatic neurosurgical inpatients.

METHODS

Cases of non–trauma-related neurosurgical patients treated at the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were reviewed. During the pandemic, all patients underwent a nasopharyngeal swab reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction test to detect COVID-19 at admission. Patients who needed immediate intervention were surgically treated following a single COVID-19 test, while stable patients who initially tested negative for COVID-19 were subjected to repeated testing at least 5 days after the first test and within 48 hours prior to the planned surgery. The COVID-19 positivity rate was compared with the local period prevalence. The number of patients who tested positive at the second test, following a negative first test, was used to determine the probable number of people who could have become infected during the surgical procedure without second testing.

RESULTS

Of the total 1769 non–trauma-related neurosurgical patients included in this study, a mean of 337.2 patients underwent surgery per month before COVID-19, while a mean of 184.2 patients (54.6% of pre–COVID-19 capacity) underwent surgery per month during the pandemic period, when COVID-19 cases were on the rise in India. There was a significant increase in the proportion of patients undergoing surgery for a ruptured aneurysm, stroke, hydrocephalus, and cerebellar tumors, while the number of patients seeking surgery for chronic benign diseases declined. At the first COVID-19 test, 4 patients (0.48%) tested were found to have the disease, a proportion 3.7 times greater than that found in the local community. An additional 5 patients tested positive at the time of the second COVID-19 test, resulting in an overall inpatient period prevalence of 1%, in contrast to a 0.2% national cumulative caseload. It is possible that COVID-19 was prevented in approximately 67.4 people every month by using double testing.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 has changed the pattern of neurosurgical procedures, with acute cases dominating the practice. Despite the fact that the pandemic has not yet reached its peak in India, COVID-19 has been detected 3.7 times more often in asymptomatic neurosurgical inpatients than in the local community, even with single testing. Double testing displays an incremental value by disclosing COVID-19 overall in 1 in 100 inpatients and thus averting its spread through neurosurgical services.

Case Report: Recurrence of Positive SARS-CoV-2 Results in Patients Recovered From COVID-19

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is spreading throughout the world. Limited data are available for recurrence of positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) results in patients with long duration of COVID-19.

Methods: We reported four cases recovered from COVID-19 with recurrence of positive SARS-CoV-2 results during the long-term follow-up.

Results: The four patients recovered from COVID-19 showed recurrence of positive SARS-CoV-2 results for more than 120 days with no symptoms and normal chest CT scan.

Conclusions: The dynamic surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 by nucleic acid detection and serological assays is important for asymptomatic patients who might be potentially infectious.

Detection-based prioritisation: Framework of multi-laboratory characteristics for asymptomatic COVID-19 carriers based on integrated Entropy-TOPSIS methods

CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND

Corona virus (COVID) has rapidly gained a foothold and caused a global pandemic. Particularists try their best to tackle this global crisis. New challenges outlined from various medical perspectives may require a novel design solution. Asymptomatic COVID-19 carriers show different health conditions and no symptoms; hence, a differentiation process is required to avert the risk of chronic virus carriers.

OBJECTIVES

Laboratory criteria and patient dataset are compulsory in constructing a new framework. Prioritisation is a popular topic and a complex issue for patients with COVID-19, especially for asymptomatic carriers due to multi-laboratory criteria, criterion importance and trade-off amongst these criteria. This study presents new integrated decision-making framework that handles the prioritisation of patients with COVID-19 and can detect the health conditions of asymptomatic carriers.

METHODS

The methodology includes four phases. Firstly, eight important laboratory criteria are chosen using two feature selection approaches. Real and simulation datasets from various medical perspectives are integrated to produce a new dataset involving 56 patients with different health conditions and can be used to check asymptomatic cases that can be detected within the prioritisation configuration. The first phase aims to develop a new decision matrix depending on the intersection between 'multi-laboratory criteria' and 'COVID-19 patient list'. In the second phase, entropy is utilised to set the objective weight, and TOPSIS is adapted to prioritise patients in the third phase. Finally, objective validation is performed.

RESULTS

The patients are prioritised based on the selected criteria in descending order of health situation starting from the worst to the best. The proposed framework can discriminate among mild, serious and critical conditions and put patients in a queue while considering asymptomatic carriers. Validation findings revealed that the patients are classified into four equal groups and showed significant differences in their scores, indicating the validity of ranking.

CONCLUSIONS

This study implies and discusses the numerous benefits of the suggested framework in detecting/recognising the health condition of patients prior to discharge, supporting the hospitalisation characteristics, managing patient care and optimising clinical prediction rule.

Necessity for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in multiple types of specimens for the discharge of the patients with COVID-19

Background

The SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected positive again after discharged from hospital in some COVID-19 patients, with or without clinical symptoms such as fever or dry cough.

Methods

1008 severe COVID-19 patients, with SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive detected with the mixed specimen of nasopharyngeal swab and oropharyngeal swab by real-time fluorescence quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR), were selected to monitor SARS-CoV-2 RNA with the 12 types of specimens by RT-qPCR during hospitalization. All of 20 discharged cases with COVID-19 were selected to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA in isolation period with 7 types of specimens by RT-qPCR before releasing the isolation period.

Results

Of the enrolled 1008 severe patients, the nasopharyngeal swab specimens showed the highest positive rate of SARS-CoV-2 RNA (71.06%), followed by alveolar lavage fluid (66.67%), oropharyngeal swab (30.77%), sputum (28.53%), urine (16.30%), blood (12.5%), stool (12.21%), anal swab (11.22%) and corneal secretion (2.99%), and SARS-CoV-2 RNA couldn’t be detected in other types of specimen in this study. Of the 20 discharged cases during the isolation period, the positive rate of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was 30% (6/20): 2 cases were positive in sputum at the eighth and ninth day after discharge, respectively, 1 case was positive in nasopharynx swab at the sixth day after discharge, 1 case was positive in anal swab at the eighth day after discharge, and 1 case was positive in 3 specimens (nasopharynx swab, oropharynx swab and sputum) simultaneously at the fourth day after discharge, and no positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in other specimens including stool, urine and blood at the discharged patients.

Conclusions

SARS-CoV-2 RNA should be detected in multiple specimens, such as nasopharynx swab, oropharynx swab, sputum, and if necessary, stool and anal swab specimens should be performed simultaneously at discharge when the patients were considered for clinical cure and before releasing the isolation period.

Comparison of clinical characteristics between patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who retested RT-PCR positive versus negative: a retrospective study of data from Nanjing

BACKGROUND

The epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been reported. However, the prevalence of retesting positive by RT-PCR for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and the associated patient characteristics, remain unclear.

METHODS

We included 90 confirmed cases of COVID-19 treated in the Nanjing Public Health Center from January 20, 2020 to February 16, 2020 in this retrospective study. All patients completed treatment for COVID-19 and were retested by RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 4-20 days after completion of therapy. The clinical characteristics between patients with who retested positive versus negative by RT-PCR were compared, and the factors predictive of positive retesting were analyzed. Positive retesting was modeled with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULTS

The age range of the study population was 0.8-97 years, and all patients were cured or showed improvement. A total of 10 (11%) patients retested positive by RT-PCR 4-20 days after completion of therapy. As compared with patients who retested negative, those who retested positive had a lower percentage of pre-admission fever, a higher percentage of post-admission fever, a lower percentage of bilateral lung infection, higher white blood cell (WBC) count and creatine phosphokinase, and lower hypersensitive c-reactive protein (hs-CRP), interleukin-6 and erythrocyte sedimentation rates (all P<0.05). Logistic regression analysis of the above eight key variables showed that lower hs-CRP and higher WBC were independently associated with positive retesting by RT-PCR. A combination of hs-CRP and WBC were predictive of positive retesting, with an AUC of 0.859.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with COVID-19 who retested positive by RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 had mild symptoms and better blood testing results. A combination of hs-CRP and WBC may predict positive retesting by RT-PCR; however, the sensitivity and specificity should be studied further.

Current meta-analysis does not support the possibility of COVID-19 reinfections

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reinfections could be a major aggravating factor in this current pandemic, as this would further complicate potential vaccine development and help to maintain worldwide virus pockets. To investigate this critical question, we conducted a clinical meta-analysis including all available currently reported cases of potential COVID-19 reinfections. We searched for all peer-reviewed articles in the search engine of the National Center for Biotechnology Information. While there are over 30,000 publications on COVID-19, only about 15 specifically target the subject of COVID-19 reinfections. Available patient data in these reports was analyzed for age, gender, time of reported relapse after initial infection and persistent COVID-19 positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results. Following the first episode of infection, cases of clinical relapse are reported at 34 (mean) ± 10.5 days after full recovery. Patients with clinical relapse have persisting positive COVID-19 PCR testing results until 39 ± 9 days following initial positive testing. For patients without clinical relapse, positive testing was reported up to 54 ± 24 days. There were no reports of any clinical reinfections after a 70-day period following initial infection.

Can elevated concentrations of ALT and AST predict the risk of 'recurrence' of COVID-19?

'Recurrence' of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has triggered numerous discussions of scholars at home and abroad. A total of 44 recurrent cases of COVID-19 and 32 control cases admitted from 11 February to 29 March 2020 to Guanggu Campus of Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji Medical College Huazhong University of Science and Technology were enrolled in this study. All the 44 recurrent cases were classified as mild to moderate when the patients were admitted for the second time. The gender and mean age in both cases (recurrent and control) were similar. At least one concomitant disease was observed in 52.27% recurrent cases and 34.38% control cases. The most prevalent comorbidity among them was hypertension. Fever and cough being the most prevalent clinical symptoms in both cases. On comparing both the cases, recurrent cases had markedly elevated concentrations of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (P = 0.020) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) (P = 0.007). Moreover, subgroup analysis showed mild to moderate abnormal concentrations of ALT and AST in recurrent cases. The elevated concentrations of ALT and AST may be recognised as predictive markers for the risk of 'recurrence' of COVID-19, which may provide insights into the prevention and control of COVID-19 in the future.

Research Progress of Genetic Structure, Pathogenic Mechanism, Clinical Characteristics, and Potential Treatments of Coronavirus Disease 2019

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), and currently affects more than 8 million people worldwide. SARS-CoV-2 mainly invades the cells by binding to the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor, leading to the injury of respiratory system, cardiovascular system, digestive system, and urinary system, and even secondary to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and systemic inflammatory response, resulting in multiple organ failure. In this review, mainly focusing on biogenesis and pathogenic mechanisms, we describe the recent progress in our understanding of SARS-CoV-2 and then summarize and discuss its crucial clinical characteristics and potential mechanism in different systems. Additionally, we discuss the potential treatments for COVID-19, aiming at a better understanding of the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 and providing new ideas for the personalized treatment of COVID-19.

Recurrence of positive SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA in recovered COVID-19 patients during medical isolation observation

Recently, the recurrence of positive SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA in recovered COVID-19 patients is receiving more attention. Herein we report a cohort study on the follow-up of 182 recovered patients under medical isolation observation. Twenty (10.99%) patients out of the 182 were detected to be SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive (re-positives), although none showed any clinical symptomatic recurrence, indicating that COVID-19 responds well to treatment. Patients aged under 18 years had higher re-positive rates than average, and none of the severely ill patients re-tested positive. There were no significant differences in sex between re-positives and non-re-positives. Notably, most of the re-positives turned negative in the following tests, and all of them carried antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. This indicates that they might not be infectious, although it is still important to perform regular SARS-CoV-2 RNA testing and follow-up for assessment of infectivity. The findings of this study provide information for improving the management of recovered patients, and for differentiating the follow-up of recovered patients with different risk levels.

Retest positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA of "recovered" patients with COVID-19: Persistence, sampling issues, or re-infection?

“Retest Positive” for severe acute respiratory syndrome‐related coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) from “recovered” coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19) has been reported and raised several important questions for this novel coronavirus and COVID‐19 disease. In this commentary, we discussed several questions: (a) Can SARS‐CoV‐2 re‐infect the individuals who recovered from COVID‐19? This question is also associated with other questions: whether or not SARS‐CoV‐2 infection induces protective reaction or neutralized antibody? Will SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccines work? (b) Why could some recovered patients with COVID‐19 be re‐tested positive for SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA? (c) Are some recovered pwith atients COVID‐19 with re‐testing positive for SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA infectious? and (d) How should the COVID‐19 patients with retest positive for SARS‐CoV‐2 be managed?

Reinfection with SARS‐CoV‐2 of the recovered COVID‐19 patients is unlikely.

Re‐test positive for SARS‐CoV‐2 of the recovered COVID‐19 patients may be due to "false‐negative", sampling sites and procedures, and delayed clearance, etc.

Patients with re‐test positive for SARS‐CoV‐2 should be treated or quarantined according the guidance.

The clinical characteristic of eight patients of COVID-19 with positive RT-PCR test after discharge

Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) was caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). The phenomenon of positive real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) result of SARS‐CoV‐2 in recovered patients had occurred and the research about these patients was rare. In our study, we did a retrospective review of medical records from COVID‐19 patients admitted to one ward of Tongji Hospital of Hua Zhong University of Science and Technology from 10 February to 13 April 2020. From 10 February to 13 April 2020, there were 108 patients of COVID‐19 admitted in the one ward of Tongji Hospital. Among them, eight cases were readmission patients because the RT‐PCR result of SARS‐CoV‐2 was positive again after discharge. On the second admission, they had no symptoms and their chest computed tomography was almost normal. Data from laboratory tests of the readmission patients showed that all eight patients had normal white blood cell count, lymphocyte count. The inflammatory factors like procalcitonin and interleukin 6 were normal. After treatment, two patients met the standard and were discharged. The other six patients were still in the hospital because their RT‐PCR of SARS‐CoV‐2 did not get three consecutive negative results and the course of two patients had persisted more than 90 days. We still needed to be alert that these patients could infect other people as a source of infection, and we also needed to be alert that these patients become chronic virus carriers. It also aroused our concern about the discharge standard of COVID‐19.

From 10 February to 13 April 2020, there were 108 patients of COVID‐19 admitted in the one ward of Tongji Hospital.

Among them, eight cases were readmission patients because the RT‐PCR result of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐COV‐2) was positive again after discharge.

The course of two patients had persisted more than 90 days.

We still needed to be alert that these patients become chronic virus carriers.

It also aroused our concern about the discharge standard of COVID‐19.