Literature DB >> 32297851

Positive RT-PCR tests among discharged COVID-19 patients in Shenzhen, China.

Xiujuan Tang1, Shi Zhao2, Daihai He3, Lin Yang4, Maggie H Wang2, Yuan Li1, Shujiang Mei1, Xuan Zou1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32297851      PMCID: PMC7205550          DOI: 10.1017/ice.2020.134

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol        ISSN: 0899-823X            Impact factor:   3.254


× No keyword cloud information.
To the Editor—According to the current guideline of the National Health Commission of China, discharge of inpatients with the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection in China have to fulfill 2 recovery criteria: (1) symptoms disappear and computed tomography (CT) images become normal and (2) test negative for 2 consecutive times in reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests for SARS-CoV-2.[1] However, Lan et al[1] recently reported 4 cases who were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at 5 days after discharge, suggesting positive status among discharged patients.[2] To date, the prevalence and associated risk factors remain unclear. We investigated all 209 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who were discharged from the designated hospital in Shenzhen, China, between January 23 and February 21, 2020. Demographic data, laboratory profile, clinical data, and CT images were collected from these patients’ electronic medical records. Throat swabs and anal swabs were collected from all patients for RT-PCR tests according to the following scenarios: (1) on February 18, 2020, for those discharged before February 12, 2019; (2) on February 19, 2020 for those discharged between February 13 and 19, 2019; (3) on days 7 and 14 after discharge thereafter. This study was approved by the Shenzhen Center for Disease Control and Prevention review board and the need for informed consent was waived. All data used in this work are available upon request and approval of Shenzhen Center for Disease Control and Prevention. We compared the settings in the study by Lan et al[2] with those in this study (Appendix Table S1 online). Logistic regression models were adopted to explore the factors associated with the RT-PCR test results. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for the probability of positive test in throat swabs, or anal swabs, or either, and the rest were considered negative in each of the 3 scenarios. The results are as follows: Scenario 1: 9 positive RT-PCR test results from throat swabs Scenario 2: 13 positive RT-PCR test results from anal swabs Scenario 3: 22 positive RT-PCR for test results from either throat or anal swabs Normally, only scenario 3 should be considered, but we included scenario 1 to be consistent with Lan et al.[2] Among all 209 discharged patients, 9 (4.3%) tested positive in throat swabs only, 13 patients (6.2%) tested positive in anal swabs only, and 22 (10.5%) tested positive in either. Together, 10.5% of discharged patients showed virus shredding around an average of 4.7 days after discharge (range, 2–13 days). Under scenario 3, the logistic regression models revealed that a high risk of positive test was significantly associated with older age (OR, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93−0.98), diarrhea during hospital stage (OR, 10.44; 95% CI, 1.60−68.16). The “during disease” stage was the other significant factor, with an adjusted and 9.59 (95% CI, 2.02−45.62) under scenarios 2 and 3, respectively. Expectoration during the disease stage is also a significant factor, with an adjusted OR of 4.00 (95% CI, 1.24−12.88) but only under scenario 3 (Table 1).
Table 1.

Summary of the Characteristics of Study Patients and the Estimated Association Between the Individual Features and RT-PCR Testing Outcomes

Throat Swabs
Scenario 1Positive(N = 9)Negative(N = 200)Crude ORAdjusted OR[a]
SexMale3880.64 (0.15–2.71)0.99 (0.27–3.62)
Age, yMedian (IQR)32 (28–36)45 (32–57)0.97 (0.93–1.00)0.95 (0.92–0.99)
Sampling delay, dMedian (IQR)2 (2–2)6 (3–7)0.41 (0.21–0.81)0.36 (0.18–0.72)
SymptomsDry cough4721.42 (0.36–5.65)1.38 (0.44–4.32)
Expectoration2271.83 (0.35–9.67)3.03 (0.61–15.14)
Cough5891.56 (0.39–6.19)1.56 (0.52–4.70)
Diarrhea192.65 (0.28–24.89)7.01 (0.52–95.40)

Note. RT-PCR, reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction; OR, odds ratio; IQR, interquartile range.

The OR is adjusted by the age, sex, sampling delay, disease severity and the backgrounds of the healthcare staff who delivered the treatment.

Summary of the Characteristics of Study Patients and the Estimated Association Between the Individual Features and RT-PCR Testing Outcomes Note. RT-PCR, reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction; OR, odds ratio; IQR, interquartile range. The OR is adjusted by the age, sex, sampling delay, disease severity and the backgrounds of the healthcare staff who delivered the treatment. Although the prevalence of virus was substantial (10.5%), no infection was discovered among close contacts. Discharged COVID-19 patients in Shenzhen are required to be self-isolated for an additional 14 days after discharge to prevent the possible transmission due to the positive test post discharge. Although live SARS-CoV-2 virus has been found in stool samples in some cases,[3] the role of fecal–oral transmission remains unclear. Among 209 patients, 10 (4.8%) had diarrhea, and this ratio is slightly higher than the 3.8% rate based on 1,099 patients nationwide,[4] and 2 of 10 patients (20%) with diarrhea showed positive tests post discharge with positive anal swabs. We report that 15.7% of patients <50 years old showed positive tests, while 2.4% of patients >50 years old showed positive tests from anal swabs. The delay between discharge and RT-PCR result date was negatively associated among positive cases of throat swabs, with an adjusted OR of 0.36 (95% CI, 0.18−0.72). This finding implies that the risk of positive tests gradually vanishes over time. Our study was limited by the lack of treatment information. Further and large-scale study on this phenomenon is warranted. Nevertheless, this study sheds lights on the viral dynamics of COVID-19.
  2 in total

1.  Positive RT-PCR Test Results in Patients Recovered From COVID-19.

Authors:  Lan Lan; Dan Xu; Guangming Ye; Chen Xia; Shaokang Wang; Yirong Li; Haibo Xu
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China.

Authors:  Wei-Jie Guan; Zheng-Yi Ni; Yu Hu; Wen-Hua Liang; Chun-Quan Ou; Jian-Xing He; Lei Liu; Hong Shan; Chun-Liang Lei; David S C Hui; Bin Du; Lan-Juan Li; Guang Zeng; Kwok-Yung Yuen; Ru-Chong Chen; Chun-Li Tang; Tao Wang; Ping-Yan Chen; Jie Xiang; Shi-Yue Li; Jin-Lin Wang; Zi-Jing Liang; Yi-Xiang Peng; Li Wei; Yong Liu; Ya-Hua Hu; Peng Peng; Jian-Ming Wang; Ji-Yang Liu; Zhong Chen; Gang Li; Zhi-Jian Zheng; Shao-Qin Qiu; Jie Luo; Chang-Jiang Ye; Shao-Yong Zhu; Nan-Shan Zhong
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 91.245

  2 in total
  14 in total

1.  Unravelling the dynamics of the COVID-19 pandemic with the effect of vaccination, vertical transmission and hospitalization.

Authors:  Rubayyi T Alqahtani; Salihu S Musa; Abdullahi Yusuf
Journal:  Results Phys       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 4.565

2.  CT suggests discharged Covid-19 patients who were retested RT-PCR positive again for SARS-CoV-2 more likely had false negative RT-PCR tests before discharging.

Authors:  Yì Xiáng J Wáng
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2020-06

3.  Aptamers, the bivalent agents as probes and therapies for coronavirus infections: A systematic review.

Authors:  Raheleh Torabi; Reza Ranjbar; Mehrdad Halaji; Mohammad Heiat
Journal:  Mol Cell Probes       Date:  2020-07-04       Impact factor: 2.365

Review 4.  SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and implications for vaccine development.

Authors:  Firzan Nainu; Rufika Shari Abidin; Muh Akbar Bahar; Andri Frediansyah; Talha Bin Emran; Ali A Rabaan; Kuldeep Dhama; Harapan Harapan
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 5.  The Current Status and Challenges in the Development of Vaccines and Drugs against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Corona Virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2).

Authors:  Narasimha M Beeraka; SubbaRao V Tulimilli; Medha Karnik; Surya P Sadhu; Rajeswara Rao Pragada; Gjumrakch Aliev; SubbaRao V Madhunapantula
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 6.  Reinfection or Reactivation of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Xiujuan Tang; Salihu S Musa; Shi Zhao; Daihai He
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2021-06-11

7.  SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid shedding is variable for every person.

Authors:  Daiana de Lima-Morales; Priscila Lamb Wink; Fabiana Caroline Zempulski Volpato; Joíza Lins Camargo; Fernanda de-Paris; Afonso Luís Barth
Journal:  Rev Soc Bras Med Trop       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 1.581

Review 8.  Discharged COVID-19 patients testing positive again for SARS-CoV-2 RNA: A minireview of published studies from China.

Authors:  Zhiyong Han; Fortunato Battaglia; Stanley R Terlecky
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 20.693

9.  Characteristics of Ocular Manifestations of Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Daegu Province, Korea.

Authors:  You Hyun Lee; Yu Cheol Kim; Jae Pil Shin
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2020-09-07       Impact factor: 2.153

10.  Continued nucleic acid tests for SARS-CoV-2 following discharge of patients with COVID-19 in Lu'an, China.

Authors:  Yong Lyu; Danni Wang; Xiude Li; Tianqi Gong; Pengpeng Xu; Lei Liu; Jie Sun
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 2.984

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.