Abstract
Background Previous studies reported the recurrence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among discharge patients. This study aimed to examine the characteristic of repositive COVID-19 cases by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Methods A systematic search was performed in PubMed and Embase and gray literature up to August 17, 2020. A random-effects model was applied to obtain the pooled prevalence of RNA repositive 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 37 studies were included in the final analysis, we have described the epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 recurrence cases. Of 2,436 patients recovering from COVID-19 and being discharged, an estimate of 16% (95% CI, 12% to 20%) patients was repositive with SARS-CoV-2 during the follow-up. This proportion was 15% (95% CI, 11% to 18%) for China and 31% (95% CI, 26% to 37%) for Korea. Among recurrence cases, it was estimated 43% (95% CI, 31% to 55%) 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 17.3, 16.7, and 10.5 days, respectively. Conclusions: 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 quarantine.
Introduction
Since December 2019, the world has been experiencing a public health crisis due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). As of September 01, 2020, about 26 million confirmed cases and 0.8 million deaths were reported from 213 countries and territories [1]. Several nationwide studies retrospectively investigated clinical features and the epidemiological characteristics of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 [2–4]. Particularly, aging and underlying chronic diseases were reported to much contribute to the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) [5,6]. However, patients with COVID-19 were generally less severe than SARS and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), with the fatality rate of 9.6%, 34.3%, and 6.6% for SARS, MERS, and COVID-19, respectively [7]. Recently, it has been reported that SARS-CoV-2 RNA shedding duration could prolong up to 83 days [8]. In addition, the repositive SARS-CoV-2 RNA test has been observed among patients who had been discharged from health care units and received regular follow-up [8]. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to examine the prevalence of the RNA repositive test for SARS-CoV-2 among recovered patients, the prevalence of subjects underlying comorbidity among recurrence cases, in addition to times from disease onset to hospital admission, from admission to hospital discharge, and from discharge to positive RNA conversion.
Methods
An electronic search of PubMed and Embase was conducted for English language studies published from the inception until August 17, 2020. The keywords for searching were as follows: “(COVID-19 OR SARS-CoV-2) AND (recurrence OR recurrences OR reinfection OR reinfection)”. Additionally, hand searching for related reports of the Centers for Disease Controls and bibliography of relevant studies was performed to obtain relevant information. For each study, the following information was extracted: first author’s name, country, study type, number of recurrence cases and discharged patients, the sample used for reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), mean or median age (years), number of males, females, and cases underlying any chronic diseases (including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, liver or kidney disease, and cancer), times from disease onset to admission, from admission to discharge, and from discharge to positive conversion (days).
In this study, heterogeneity was quantified by the I2 statistics, in which I2>50% was defined as potential heterogeneity [9]. Given data are from different populations of various characteristics, a random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled effect size and its 95% confidence interval (CI) when the evidence from at least two individual studies was available [10]. All the statistical analyses were performed using STATA 14.0 software.
Results
The study selection process is presented in Figure 1. Initial 550 records were retrieved through PubMed (N = 239) and Embase (N = 311) and additional 1 gray literature through hand searching was identified. Among records after removing duplicates and non-English publications (N = 128), 423 studies were potentially relevant through reviewing titles and abstracts. After reviewing full-text articles, 15 studies were excluded because they reported overlapping cases (N = 6) or irrelevant population (N = 3), there was no information for outcomes of interest (N = 4), and they were studies of mechanisms or modeling (N = 2). The remaining 37 studies were therefore eligible for the final analysis [11–47].
Flowchart of study selection
A detailed description of extracted data of included studies is shown in Table 1. Thirty-eight studies reported 466 recurrence cases from China (N = 30, 346 cases), Korea (N = 1, 83 cases), Iran (N = 1, 1 case), Italy (N = 2, 3 cases), France (N = 1, 11 cases), Brazil (N = 1, 1 case), and US (N = 1, 1 case). The study design included case reports (N = 14), case series (N = 5), and observational studies (N = 18).
Summary of studies reporting recurrence of COVID-19 cases after discharge
The calculation of the epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 recurrence cases is presented in Table 2. Data for age were provided from 31 studies for 276 recurrence cases, with a mean age of 45.4 years. Among 363 recurrence cases from 34 studies, 158 cases were males, which accounted for 43.5%. Times from disease onset to admission, from admission to discharge, and from discharge to RNA positive conversion were available for 116, 101, 285 cases from 15, 17, and 26 studies, respectively. The estimates for times from disease onset to admission, from admission to discharge, and from discharge to RNA positive conversion were 17.3, 16.7, and 10.5 days, respectively.
Epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 recurrence cases Characteristic No. studies
The prevalence of COVID-19 recurrence cases after discharge was calculated from data of 18 observational studies (Figure 2). Among 2,436 discharged patients, the RT-PCR test turned to be positive in 324 Chinese and 83 Korean subjects. Overall, the prevalence of recurrence cases was 16% (95% CI, 12% to 20%). Substantial heterogeneity among studies was observed, with I2 of 83.08%. In the subgroup analysis by population, the prevalence was reported to be 15% (95% CI, 11% to 18%) for China and 31% (95% CI, 26% to 37%) for Korea.
Forest plot for meta-analysis of COVID-19 recurrence prevalence
Furthermore, it was reported 55 subjects underlying comorbidity among a total of 121 recurrence cases, which accounted for 43% (95% CI, 31% to 55%) (Figure 3). There was no evidence of heterogeneity (I2 = 41.09%). Subgroup analysis showed the proportion of 64% (95% CI, 35% to 85%) for France cases and 40% (28% to 53%) for Chinese cases.
Forest plot for meta-analysis of comorbidity among COVID-19 recurrence cases
Discussion
In this systematic review and meta-analysis of 37 studies, we have described the epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 recurrence cases. Of 2,436 patients recovering from COVID-19 and being discharged, an estimate of 16% (95% CI, 12% to 20%) of patients was repositive with SARS-CoV-2 during the follow-up. This proportion was 15% (95% CI, 11% to 18%) for China and 31% (95% CI, 26% to 37%) for Korea. Among recurrence cases, it was estimated 43% (95% CI, 31% to 55%) subjects underlying at least one comorbidity.
According to the guidelines of the World Health Organization, a patient can be discharged from the hospital after two consecutive negative results in a clinically recovered patient at least 24 hours apart [48]. However, the discharge criteria for confirmed COVID-19 cases are additionally required according to different countries [49]. The determination of recurrence cases can be caused by false negatives, which ranged from 2% to 29% according to a meta-analysis of 957 hospitalized patients [50]. The reason for false negatives can be due to the source of specimens, sampling procedure, and the sensitivity and specificity of the test kit [8]. In a preprint study of 213 Chinese patients, a total of 205 throat swabs, 490 nasal swabs, and 142 sputum samples were collected, and the false-negative rates were reported of 40%, 27%, and 11% for the throat, nasal, and sputum samples, respectively [51]. Due to the lack of individual data, we were not able to examine the prevalence of recurrence cases in the subgroup analysis by types of specimens. Furthermore, it may require considering prolonged SARS-CoV-2 shedding in asymptomatic or mild cases and recurrence of viral shedding [52]. Data from 68 patients revealed a significantly longer duration of viral shedding from sputum specimens (34 days) than nasopharyngeal swabs(19 days) [53]. Consistent findings were reported in an asymptomatic case with viral detection positive in stool but negative in nasopharyngeal swab lasts for 42 days [54]. Similarly, the positive rate of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA test was shown to be highest for the sputum sample (100%), followed by nasal swab (75%), oral swab (40%), and stool specimen (38%) [28]. Nevertheless, although the RT-PCT results of discharge patients were possible to turn positive, it is necessary to distinguish between reactivation and reinfection cases [8].
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. However, several limitations need to be mentioned. First, 81% of the included studies (30/37) with 74% recurrence cases (346/466) come from the Chinese population, which may reduce the availability to generalize the pooled estimates into other populations. Second, heterogeneity for the prevalence of recurrence cases was substantially presented among studies. The different characteristics, discharge criteria, and the test samples used among study populations included in this meta-analysis may have contributed to the heterogeneity. Last, all the estimates in the current study are based on aggregate data from published articles. Failure to obtain individual patient data may lead to bias due to the lack of full exploration and adjustment for patient characteristics [55].
In summary, an estimate of 16% of COVID-19 patients was repositive after discharge. Among them, 43% of subjects were underlying comorbidity. It is recommended to pay attention to follow-up patients after discharge by closely monitoring their RT-PCR results, even if they have been in quarantine for 14 days. Further studies are needed to determine factors associated with positive RT-PCR in COVID-19 patients after discharge.
Data Availability
Data for all the analyses are available in Table 1.
Conflict of interest
None.
Funding
None.