A follow-up study shows no new infections caused by patients with repeat positive of COVID-19 in Wuhan

Background

The ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has caused more than 49 million cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) illness and over 1.2 million people were dead duo to the coronavirus worldwide by November 2020(1). Guidelines from WHO on clinical management recommend that a clinically recovered COVID-19 patient should test negative for the virus twice, with testing supervised by trained professionals and conducted at least 24 hours apart, before being discharged from the hospital. It has been reported that a few recovered COVID-19 patients could suffer repeat positive, testing positive for the virus again within the 14-day isolation period(2–4). The number of patients reported to have had repeat positive of COVID-19 is small and the duration of follow-up has been short. Understanding the epidemiological characteristics of patients with repeat positive is vital in preventing a second wave of COVID-19.

Methods

Results

In total, 20,280 patients were collected and followed. Among them, 2,466(12.16%) patients presented with a repeat positive of SARS-CoV-2 after they were discharged from hospital. The demographic and epidemiological characteristics of the these patients are similar to the first infections (shown in Table 1). The median treatment time for patients without repeat positive in hospital was 15.71days (interquartile range [IQR], 9.83 to 23.21) and the median treatment time for the first infection in patients with a repeat positive was 18.54 days (interquartile range [IQR], 11.96 to 27.04). The treatment time for first infection in patients with a repeat positive was significantly longer than that in patients without a repeat positive (p-value <0.001from Student t-test). For the repeat positive, the median treatment time was 10.63 days (interquartile range [IQR], 7.67 to 15.63). The treatment time for the repeat positive was shorter than that for the first infection among the patients with a repeat positive. The median time from discharge from hospital to the start of a second positive was 11.00 days (IQR, 9.00 to 17.00). A total of 56.12% were female. The median age of the patients was 56.00 years (IQR, 42.25 to 65.00). In addition, more than half of the patients (50.9%, n=1256) were aged between 50 and 70 years (accounted for 15.6% of the total population in Wuhan). Symptoms of first infection for patients with repeat positive were 0.24% asymptomatic, 49.67% mild, 35.59% moderate, 12.05% severe and 2.40% critical. For the symptoms of the second positive, of 2,466, 193(7.83%) patients had fever, cough or shortness of breath. Specifically, 158(6.41%) patients had fever, 59 (2.39%) patients had cough and 18(0.73%) patients had shortness of breath. 32(1.30%) patients had both fever and cough. 1(0.04%) patient had both cough and shortness of breath. 9 (0.36%) patients had both fever and shortness of breath. No patients had three types of symptom at the same time. 11 of 2,466 patients were passed away.

A logistic regression model was used to check the factors related to a repeat positive. The age had no effects (coeff.=0.001, P=0.379) on the probability of a repeat positive. Interestingly, we found that the gender had a significantly role (coeff.=-0.119, P=0.005). The males had a lower risk of developing a repeat positive compared to females.

To investigate whether the patients with repeat positive can cause the new infections, we collected the PCR results for the people who had close contact with patients with repeat positive. Of 2,466 patients with repeat positive, 1,201 patients were tested positive in rehabilitation center and there were no individuals who had close contact with them. So these 1,201 patients had no chance to infect healthy persons. 1,265 patients were tested positive after they went back home. 4,079 individuals had close contact with them. The PCR result were negative for the 4,079 individuals. This indicates that the patients with repeat positive don’t cause new infections.

Discussion

Although several studies have reported patients with repeat positive of COVID-19, most are based on a limited sample and the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 reactivation ranged from 9% (5/55)(2) to 14.5% (38/262)(4). This study retrospectively analyzed clinical data in a cohort of 20,280 patients in Wuhan. We confirmed that in 12.16% of COVID-19 patients, SARS-CoV-2 could be isolated again after discharge from hospital. The time from SARS-CoV-2 negative to positive ranged from 1 to 165 days, suggesting that recovered patients still may be virus carriers and require additional round of viral detection and isolation. Note that the repeat positive could also be the virus fragment coming from the first infection because the PCR test only detects the fragments of SARS-CoV-2 genome, not viable virus. Another study shown that no infectious strain could be obtained by culture and no full-length viral genomes could be sequenced from 87 re-positive cases(7). These may explain why there were no secondary infection. Although this study does not completely exclude the possibility of reinfection, however, given the 28-day isolation and 84.07% (2058/2448) of the repeat positive occurred during this isolation in Wuhan, most of these patients have apparently not caused new infections after discharge from hospital in Wuhan.

Conclusions

In this follow-up study in Wuhan, we show the basic characteristics of patients with repeat positive and no new infections caused by patients with repeat positive of COVID-19.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The epidemiological and clinical data collection was exempt from Institutional Review Boards, because it was part of public health investigation for COVID-19, issued by the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China (http://www.nhc.gov.cn/jkj/s3577/202003/4856d5b0458141fa9f376853224d41d7.shtml). This study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards from Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

The data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

This work was supported by the Major Prevention Projects of Hubei Province Health Committee (WJ2019H303); Beijing Natural Science Foundation (JQ18025); Beijing Advanced Innovation Program for Land Surface Science; National Natural Science Foundation of China (81673234); Young Elite Scientist Sponsorship Program by CAST (YESS)(2018QNRC001). HT acknowledge support from the Oxford Martin School. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Author contributions

X.W., F.H., Y.L., H.T, Z.H., H.W. designed the study. X.W., Y.W., Z.H. collected the statistical data. Y.L. and Z.W conducted the analyses. H.T. wrote the manuscript. All authors read and approved the manuscript.