There is recently a concern regarding the reinfection and reactivation of previously reCoVered coronavirus disease 2019 (CoVID-19) patients.

To summarize the recent findings and reports of CoVID-19 reinfection in patients previously reCoVered from the disease.

This study was a systematic review of current evidence conducted in August 2020. The authors studied the probable reinfection risk of novel coronavirus (CoVID-19). We performed a systematic search using the keywords in online databases. The investigation adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist to ensure the reliability and validity of this study and results.

We reviewed 31 studies. Eight studies described reCoVered patients with reinfection. Only one study reported reinfected patients who died. In 26 studies, there was no information about the status of the patients. Several studies indicated that reinfection is not probable and that post-infection immunity is at least temporary and short.

Based on our review, we concluded that a positive polymerase chain reaction retest could be due to several reasons and should not always be considered as reinfection or reactivation of the disease. Most relevant studies in positive retest patients have shown relative and probably temporary immunity after the reCoVery of the disease.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a new strain of coronavirus, causes coronavirus disease 2019 (CoVID-19), which was first reported in China in late 2019 and then spread rapidly worldwide[1-5]. The symptoms of CoVID-19 are high temperature, dry cough, shortness of breath, headache, tiredness, loss of taste or smell, and gastrointestinal symptoms such as diarrhea, anorexia, nausea, and abdominal pain[6-8]. Increased liver enzyme and low counts of lymphocytes (lymphocytopenia) along with increased C-reactive protein (CRP) levels are often present in CoVD-19 patients[9]. It could eventually lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and death[1,10,11]. Although there is currently no certainty in virus biological behavior and risk of recurrence in the human body, recent studies reported evidence of the virus reactivation following an asymptomatic CoVID-19 infection in a small group of patients[1,12,13].

The risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 reactivation are related to the type of immuno-suppressive therapies, factors in the host such as older age, gender, underlying diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, obesity, cancer, and virologic factors[1,14]. Some viruses such as varicella-zoster can remain dormant in host cells for some time, not causing any illness and then reactivate and cause the disease. Recent evidence indicates that SARS-CoV-2 could present similar behavior and reactivate in patients with previously confirmed CoVID-19 infection and cause illness and person-to-person transmission[15].

Recent studies reported that some reCoVered CoVID-19 patients tested positive for virus nucleic acid again[16,17]. Elderly people with comorbidities are more likely to present with CoVID-19 reinfection[18]. Studies suggested that there are three major mechanisms for the reinfection of CoVID-19, including short-lived, ineffective, and strain-specific immune response[19,20].

The gold standard test for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection is nasopharyngeal swab. Swabs from patients who reCoVered from CoVID-19 infection are negative, indicating full reCoVery from CoVID-19 infection. However, a certain number of individuals could be a false negative[17,18], because the samples for identifying SARS-CoV-2 viral load depend on the result of reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). SARS-CoV-2 uses angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE-2) as the receptor for cellular entry. The expression of ACE2 protein in the lungs is more than that in the upper respiratory tract. Therefore, it is important from which site the sample was taken in a patient with CoVID-19, as it may cause false-negative RT-PCR results[21].

In recent studies, SARS-CoV-2 was detected in fecal and sputum specimens of patients who were discharged from the hospital with a negative pharyngeal swab after a couple of weeks[17,22]. In other coronavirus pandemics such as Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), immunoglobulin levels in patients lasted for a minimum of 2 years, indicating that patients could be vulnerable to reinfection after 3 years[23,24]. The tests that detect SARS-CoV-2 genetic material are very sensitive; however, in patients who have reCoVered from CoVID-19, virus fragments can persist in the body and can be detected by the test. This should not be considered as a new infection[23].

The reinfection in patients reCoVered from CoVID-19 could create a serious challenge in tackling the CoVID-19 pandemic as the reCoVered patients could be a source of virus spread in society[19]. Previous studies have found a positive viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) test in some discharged CoVID-19 patients 10 to 27 d after reCoVery[1,19]. Recurrence of CoVID-19 after reCoVery should be differentiated from secondary medical conditions such as super infection, pulmonary embolism, or persistent RNA virus that can be disCoVered in respiratory specimens in clinically cured CoVID-19 patients[25]. This review aims to provide a systematic compilation of SARS-CoV-2 reactivation in reCoVered CoVID-19 patients.

This study was a systematic literature review of current evidence conducted in August 2020. The authors studied the probable reinfection risk of novel coronavirus (CoVID-19). Our study adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist to ensure the reliability and validity of this study and results.

In this study, 981 documents were identified using a systematic search strategy. After a primary review of retrieved articles, 498 duplicates were removed, and the title and abstract of the remaining 483 resources were reviewed. After applying the selection criteria, 552 articles were excluded, and only 31 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final review (Figure 1).

Open in New Tab   Full Size Figure   Download Figure

Figure 1 Flow diagram for the selection process of identified articles.

We have reviewed 35 studies. Eight studies described reCoVered patients with reinfection. Only one study reported reinfected patients who died. In 26 studies, there was no information about the status of the patients (Table 1)[2,10,16,17,20,25-28,30-53].

Several studies indicated that reinfection is not probable and that postinfection immunity is at least temporarily and short; however, other studies, particularly from South Korea and China, reported some reinfection cases. South Korea reported that 116 reCoVered cases of CoVID-19 were found to be positive again[16]. Another study from South Korea reported that up to 163 patients who were presumed to have reCoVered from SARS-CoV-2 ended up testing positive again[20]. Several studies from China do not support reinfection[26-29]. There is only one study from China that reported five cases of reactivation[5].

The results of the present study showed that there are many factors that we need to take into account about reinfection. Some cases may have resulted in a false negative at discharge or patients did not completely meet discharge criteria. Although we should not forget that reinfection could be possible, because some studies have shown humoral immunity weakens over time.

Due to the widespread expansion of the CoVID-19 epidemic around the world, there are more and more infected cases, and of course, many people have reCoVered from this viral infection. However, there is recently a concern regarding the reinfection in previously reCoVered SARS-CoV-2 patients. In the present review, we summarized the recent findings and reports of CoVID-19 reinfection in patients previously reCoVered from the disease. This is important to inform the public regarding the possible risk of reinfection to restrain the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and control the current epidemic[25].

The findings from the current review of existing evidence suggest two possible scenarios for new infection in patients who were previously reCoVered from CoVD-19, including reinfection and reactivation. Studies have shown some cases of symptom recurrence such as fever, malaise, myalgia, and cough after discharge. The positive PCR test confirmed the infection and suggested reinfection. Although this has been attributed to the biological characteristics of CoVID-19 and other factors, such as underlying diseases, clinical status, glucocorticoid use, sample collection, patient detection, follow-up, and even secondary bacterial infection, it could be due to reinfection with CoVID-19[53,54]. Positive follow-up tests may also derive from the remained virus transferred from the lower respiratory tract to the throat and nose with coughing. Therefore, it is suggested that the fluid collected in the bronchoalveolar lavage of the lower respiratory tract should be tested and used as the discharge criteria in SARS-CoV-2 patients[28]. In fact, a retest can be positive due to several reasons; thus, it is difficult to distinguish between reinfection, reactivation, or other causes.

Among the reviewed studies, six studies emphasized short-term immunity following reCoVery[18,19,25,26,33,35]. One study indicated that the antibodies and the immunity could last about 40 d and that there is a possibility of reinfection or reactivation of latent infection after this period. Therefore, reCoVery from CoVID-19 might not confer immunity against reinfection forever[38,39]. Furthermore, previous studies related to other human coronavirus types suggested the possibility of reinfection by other members of the coronavirus family following reCoVery from a particular type[24]. Although there are previous studies that suggest the reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 is unlikely, we must maintain vigilance during the convalescence period and consider the probability of genetic mutations as observed rather than reinfection by the same strain[6,29,33,34].

The results of the present study showed that there are many factors that we need to take into account about reinfection. Some cases may have resulted in false negative at discharge or patients did not completely meet discharge criteria. We should not forget, however, that reinfection could be possible because some studies have shown humoral immunity weakens over time. The certainty regarding the reinfection in CoVID-19 patients is limited, and we strongly recommend further studies to explore the virological, immunological, and epidemiologic characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 to determine the biological behavior of the virus and describe the potential mechanisms of disease recurrences.

In conclusion, positive PCR retest results could be due to several reasons such as the type of specimen collection and technical errors associated with each component of swab testing, the methods used before discharging patients, prolonged viral shedding, and infection by mutated SARS-CoV-2. Thus, it should not always be considered as a reinfection or reactivation of the disease. Furthermore, most relevant studies on symptomatic and positive retest patients have shown relative and probably temporary immunity after the reCoVery of the disease, which means that immunity acquired following primary infection with SARS-CoV-2 may protect from subsequent exposure to the virus at least for a limited period.

The present study was conducted in collaboration with Khalkhal University of Medical Sciences, Iranian Institute for Reduction of High Risk Behaviors, Tehran University of Medical Sciences and Department of Global Health and Socio-epidemiology, Kyoto University.