Recurrent COVID-19 in Hemodialysis: A Case Report of 2 Possible Reinfections.

Patients receiving in-center hemodialysis are at high risk for infections due to relative immunosuppression, limited ability to physically distance, and frequent encounters with the health care setting. This has been particularly evident during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We describe 2 patients with suspected recurrent COVID-19 infection, each with documented clearance of virus between episodes. The duration between a negative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction test result for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and symptomatic reinfection was 31 and 55 days, respectively, in the 2 patients. A higher risk for infection with COVID-19 and poor outcomes if infected, including ≥20% short-term mortality risk, is worrisome in this patient population. Continued measures such as infection prevention, community outreach, and early testing may play a role in establishing protocols to protect the vulnerable dialysis population.

Demand for longer quarantine period among common and uncommon COVID-19 infections: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: As one of the non-pharmacological interventions to control the transmission of COVID-19, determining the quarantine duration is mainly based on the accurate estimates of the incubation period. However, patients with coarse information of the exposure date, as well as infections other than the symptomatic, were not taken into account in previously published studies. Thus, by using the statistical method dealing with the interval-censored data, we assessed the quarantine duration for both common and uncommon infections. The latter type includes the presymptomatic, the asymptomatic and the recurrent test positive patients. METHODS: As of 10 December 2020, information on cases have been collected from the English and Chinese databases, including Pubmed, Google scholar, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) and Wanfang. Official websites and medias were also searched as data sources. All data were transformed into doubly interval-censored and the accelerated failure time model was applied. By estimating the incubation period and the time-to-event distribution of worldwide COVID-19 patients, we obtain the large percentiles for determining and suggesting the quarantine policies. For symptomatic and presymptomatic COVID-19 patients, the incubation time is the duration from exposure to symptom onset. For the asymptomatic, we substitute the date of first positive result of nucleic acid testing for that of symptom onset. Furthermore, the time from hospital discharge or getting negative test result to the positive recurrence has been calculated for recurrent positive patients. RESULTS: A total of 1920 laboratory confirmed COVID-19 cases were included. Among all uncommon infections, 34.1% (n = 55) of them developed symptoms or were identified beyond fourteen days. Based on all collected cases, the 95th and 99th percentiles were estimated to be 16.2 days (95% CI 15.5-17.0) and 22.9 days (21.7‒24.3) respectively. Besides, we got similar estimates based on merely symptomatic and presymptomatic infections as 15.1 days (14.4‒15.7) and 21.1 days (20.0‒22.2). CONCLUSIONS: There are a certain number of infected people who require longer quarantine duration. Our findings well support the current practice of the extended active monitoring. To further prevent possible transmissions induced and facilitated by such infectious outliers after the 14-days quarantine, properly prolonging the quarantine duration could be prudent for high-risk scenarios and in regions with insufficient test resources.

Favipiravir in the treatment of patients with SARS-CoV-2 RNA recurrent positive after discharge: A multicenter, open-label, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The clinical characteristics and treatment of patients who tested positive for COVID-19 after recovery remained elusive. Effective antiviral therapy is important for tackling these patients. We assessed the efficacy and safety of favipiravir for treating these patients. METHODS: This is a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial in SARS-CoV-2 RNA re-positive patients. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either favipiravir, in addition to standard care, or standard care alone. The primary outcome was time to achieve a consecutive twice (at intervals of more than 24 h) negative RT-PCR result for SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swab and sputum sample. RESULTS: Between March 27 and May 9, 2020, 55 patients underwent randomization; 36 were assigned to the favipiravir group and 19 were assigned to the control group. Favipiravir group had a significantly shorter time from start of study treatment to negative nasopharyngeal swab and sputum than control group (median 17 vs. 26 days); hazard ratio 2.1 (95% CI [1.1-4.0], p = 0.038). The proportion of virus shedding in favipiravir group was higher than control group (80.6% [29/36] vs. 52.6% [10/19], p = 0.030, respectively). C-reactive protein decreased significantly after treatment in the favipiravir group (p = 0.016). The adverse events were generally mild and self-limiting. CONCLUSION: Favipiravir was safe and superior to control in shortening the duration of viral shedding in SARS-CoV-2 RNA recurrent positive after discharge. However, a larger scale and randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial is required to confirm our conclusion.

The relationship between SARS-COV-2 RNA positive duration and the risk of recurrent positive.

BACKGROUND: The management of discharge COVID-19 patients with recurrent positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA is challenging. However, there are fewer scientific dissertations about the risk of recurrent positive. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between SARS-COV-2 RNA positive duration (SPD) and the risk of recurrent positive. METHODS: This case-control multi-center study enrolled participants from 8 Chinese hospital including 411 participants (recurrent positive 241). Using unadjusted and multivariate-adjusted logistic regression analyses, generalized additive model with a smooth curve fitting, we evaluated the associations between SPD and risk of recurrent positive. Besides, subgroup analyses were performed to explore the potential interactions. RESULTS: Among recurrent positive patients, there were 121 females (50.2%), median age was 50 years old [interquartile range (IQR): 38-63]. In non-adjusted model and adjusted model, SPD was associated with an increased risk of recurrent positive (fully-adjusted model: OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.02-1.08, P = 0.001); the curve fitting was not significant (P = 0.286). Comparing with SPD < 14 days, the risk of recurrent positive in SPD > 28 days was risen substantially (OR = 3.09, 95% CI: 1.44-6.63, P = 0.004). Interaction and stratified analyses showed greater effect estimates of SPD and risk of recurrent positive in the hypertension, low monocyte count and percentage patients (P for interaction = 0.008, 0.002, 0.036, respectively). CONCLUSION: SPD was associated with a higher risk of recurrent positive and especially SPD > 28 day had a two-fold increase in the relative risk of re-positive as compared with SPD < 14 day. What's more, the risk may be higher among those with hypertension and lower monocyte count or percentage.

Clinical characteristics and potential factors for recurrence of positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA in convalescent patients: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The recurrence of positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR is frequently found in discharged COVID-19 patients but its clinical significance remains unclear. The potential cause, clinical characteristics and infectiousness of the recurrent positive RT-PCR patients need to be answered. METHODS: A single-centered, retrospective study of 51 discharged COVID-19 patients was carried out at a designated hospital for COVID-19. The demographic data, clinical records and laboratory findings of 25 patients with recurrent positive RT-PCR from hospitalization to follow-up were collected and compared to 26 patients with negative RT-PCR discharged regularly during the same period. Discharged patients' family members and close contacts were also interviewed by telephone to evaluate patients' potential infectiousness. RESULTS: The titer of both IgG and IgM antibodies was significantly lower (p = 0.027, p = 0.011) in patients with recurrent positive RT-PCR. Median duration of viral shedding significantly prolonged in patients with recurrent positive RT-PCR (36.0 days vs 9.0 days, p = 0.000). There was no significant difference in demographic features, clinical features, lymphocyte subsets count and inflammatory cytokines levels between the two groups of patients. No fatal case was noted in two groups. As of the last day of follow-up, none of the discharged patients' family members or close contact developed any symptoms of COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low levels of IgG and IgM are more likely to have recurrent positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results and lead to a prolonged viral shedding. The recurrent positive of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR may not indicate the recurrence or aggravation of COVID-19. The detection of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR in the patients recovered from COVID-19 is not necessarily correlated with the ability of transmission.

Viral RNA level, serum antibody responses, and transmission risk in recovered COVID-19 patients with recurrent positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA test results: a population-based observational cohort study.

Managing recovered COVID-19 patients with recurrent-positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA test results is challenging. We performed a population-based observational study to characterize the viral RNA level and serum antibody responses in recurrent-positive patients and evaluate their viral transmission risk. Of 479 recovered COVID-19 patients, 93 (19%) recurrent-positive patients were identified, characterized by younger age, with a median discharge-to-recurrent-positive length of 8 days. After readmission, recurrent-positive patients exhibited mild (28%) or absent (72%) symptoms, with no disease progression. The viral RNA level in recurrent-positive patients ranged from 1.8 to 5.7 log10 copies/mL (median: 3.2), which was significantly lower than the corresponding values at disease onset. There are generally no significant differences in antibody levels between recurrent-positive and non-recurrent-positive patients, or in recurrent-positive patients over time (before, during, or after recurrent-positive detection). Virus isolation of nine representative specimens returned negative results. Whole genome sequencing of six specimens yielded only genomic fragments. 96 close contacts and 1,200 candidate contacts of 23 recurrent-positive patients showed no clinical symptoms; their viral RNA (1,296/1,296) and antibody (20/20) tests were negative. After full recovery (no longer/never recurrent-positive), 60% (98/162) patients had neutralizing antibody titers of ≥1:32. Our findings suggested that an intermittent, non-stable excretion of low-level viral RNA may result in recurrent-positive occurrence, rather than re-infection. Recurrent-positive patients pose a low transmission risk, a relatively relaxed management of recovered COVID-19 patients is recommended.