Dataset Information

A COVID-19 patient with multiple negative results for PCR assays outside Wuhan, China: a case report.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become a public health emergency of major international concern. Real-time RT-PCR assays are recommended for diagnosis of COVID-19. Here we report a rare case of COVID-19 with multiple negative results for PCR assays outside Wuhan, China.

Case presentation

A 32-year old male was admitted to our hospital because of 6 days of unexplained fever on January 29, 2020. He had come from Wuhan city 10 days before admission. Five days before admission, no abnormality was noted in laboratory test, chest radiography, and nasopharyngeal swab test for the SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid. The patient was treated with ibuprofen for alleviating fever. On admission, chest computed tomography showed multiple ground-glass opacities in right lower lung field. COVID-19 was suspected. Three times of nasopharyngeal swab specimens were collected after admission. However, none of the specimens were positive. The patient was confirmed with COVID-19 after fifth SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test. He was treated with lopinavir/ritonavir, recombinant human interferon alfa-2b inhalation, methylprednisolone. After 18 days of treatment, he was discharged with improved symptoms, lung lesions and negative results of nasopharyngeal swab.

Conclusion

This case reminds clinician that a patient with high clinical suspicion of COVID-19 but multiple negative RT-PCR result should not be taken out of isolation. A combination of patient's exposure history, clinical manifestations, laboratory tests, and typical imaging findings plays a vital role in making preliminary diagnosis and guide early isolation and treatment. Repeat swab tests are helpful in diagnosis for this kind of patients.

SUBMITTER: Chen LD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7364136 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA false-negative case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is defined as a person with suspected infection and an initial negative result by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, with a positive result on a subsequent test. False-negative cases have important implications for isolation and risk of transmission of infected people and for the management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to review and critically appraise evidence about the rate of RT-PCR false-negatives at initial testing for COVID-19.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, as well as COVID-19 repositories, including the EPPI-Centre living systematic map of evidence about COVID-19 and the Coronavirus Open Access Project living evidence database. Two authors independently screened and selected studies according to the eligibility criteria and collected data from the included studies. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. We calculated the proportion of false-negative test results using a multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression model. The certainty of the evidence about false-negative cases was rated using the GRADE approach for tests and strategies. All information in this article is current up to July 17, 2020.ResultsWe included 34 studies enrolling 12,057 COVID-19 confirmed cases. All studies were affected by several risks of bias and applicability concerns. The pooled estimate of false-negative proportion was highly affected by unexplained heterogeneity (tau-squared = 1.39; 90% prediction interval from 0.02 to 0.54). The certainty of the evidence was judged as very low due to the risk of bias, indirectness, and inconsistency issues.ConclusionsThere is substantial and largely unexplained heterogeneity in the proportion of false-negative RT-PCR results. The collected evidence has several limitations, including risk of bias issues, high heterogeneity, and concerns about its applicability. Nonetheless, our findings reinforce the need for repeated testing in patients with suspicion of SARS-Cov-2 infection given that up to 54% of COVID-19 patients may have an initial false-negative RT-PCR (very low certainty of evidence).Systematic review registrationProtocol available on the OSF website: https://tinyurl.com/vvbgqya.

Project description:ObjectiveDuring the follow-up of patients recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the quarantine and observation period, some of the cured patients showed positive results again. The recurrent positive RT-PCR test results drew widespread concern. We observed a certain number of cured COVID-19 patients with positive RT-PCR test results and try to analyze the factors that caused the phenomenon.MethodsWe conducted an observational study in COVID-19 patients discharged from 6 rehabilitation stations in Wuhan, China. All observed subjects met the criteria for hospital discharge and were in quarantine. Data regarding age, sex, body mass index (BMI), course of disease, comorbidity, smoking status and alcohol consumption, symptoms in and out of quarantine, and intervention were collected from the subjects' medical records and descriptively analyzed. The main outcome of this study was the RT-PCR test result of the observed subjects at the end of quarantine (negative or positive). Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the influencing factors related to recurrent positive RT-PCR test results.ResultsIn this observational study, 420 observed subjects recovered from COVID-19 were included. The median age was 56 years, 63.6% of the subjects were above 50 years old, and 50.7% (213/420) were female. The most common comorbidities were hypertension [26.4% (111/420)], hyperlipidemia [10.7% (45/420)], and diabetes [10.5% (44/420)]. 54.8% (230/420) manifested one or more symptoms at the beginning of the observation period, the most common symptoms were cough [27.6% (116/420)], shortness of breath 23.8% (100/420)], and fatigue [16.2% (68/420)], with fever rare [2.6% (11/420)]. A total of 325 subjects were exposed to comprehensive intervention; 95 subjects were absence of intervention. The recurrence rate of positive RT-PCR test results with comprehensive intervention was 2.8% (9/325), and that with no intervention was 15.8% (15/95). The results of logistic regression analysis showed that after adjusted for factors such as age, sex, and comorbidity and found out that comprehensive intervention was correlated with the recurrent positive RT-PCR test results. There was appreciably less recurrence in the comprehensive intervention group.ConclusionsThe factors related to positive RT-PCR test results in observed subjects recovered from COVID-19 were age, comorbidity, and comprehensive intervention, among which comprehensive intervention might be a protective factor.Clinical trial registrationChictr.org.cn, identifier ChiCTR2000030747.