Detection of the genetic material of SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus and recurrence of infection symptoms in patients after a previous double negative result by RT-qPCR
More details
Hide details
Basic Health Care, Poland
Medical University, Lublin, Poland
Magdalena Krysa-Pietraszek   

Basic Health Care, Lublin, Poland
For over a year, the entire world has been struggling with the COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. The gold diagnostic standard is the detection of specific fragments of the virus genome using molecular biology techniques (RT-qPCR) performed during the most intensive replication, i.e. within 10 days of the onset of infection symptoms. The time needed to eliminate the virus from the system has not been precisely defined. Obtaining reactive results of RT-qPCR tests in people recognized as convalescent after the previous negative result of the molecular test is becoming an increasingly common problem.

Case report:
We analyzed the case of a patient who had been discharged home without clinical symptoms, after obtaining two negative RT-qPCR results, which took place 23 days after confirming his infection. After 6 days from the date of discharge, the patient returned with symptoms typical of COVID-19 and obtained a positive RT-qPCR test result.

There may be many reasons for obtaining a reactive test result for the presence of coronavirus in the material from the body of a person considered to be convalescent. Clinical data is still being collected and research is ongoing. In addition to false-positive or false-negative results of the tests performed, it is assumed that the possible cause of this phenomenon may be the excretion of dead cells from the body that contain inactive virus particles, which may be a natural part of the healing process and is not infectious.

Dzieciątkowski T, Filipiak KJ, et al. Coronavirus SARS CoV-2-danger for today’s world. Ed 1. Warsaw; 2021. p. 37–42.
Wiersinga WJ, Rhodes A, Chenge AC, et al. Patophysiology, transmission, diagnosis and treatment of coronawirus disease 2019(COVID-19):a review. JAMA. 2020 Aug; 324(8): 782–79.
3. Alireza T, Abdollah A. Real-time PCR in COVID-19 detection: issues affecting the results. Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics. 2020 May; 20(5): 453–545.
Qi L, Yang Y, Jiang D, et al. Factors associated with the duration of viral shedding in adults with COVID-19 outside of Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Int J Infect Dis. 2020, May; 96: 531–537.
Zhang Y, Wang Ch, Han M, et al. Discrimination of False Negative Results in RT-PCR Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNAs in Clinical Specimens by Using an Internal Reference. Virologica Sinica. 2020 Dec; 35: 758–767.
Cao H, Ruan L, Liu J, et al. The clinical characteristic of eight patients of COVID-19 with positive RT-PCR test after discharge. J Med Virol. 2020 May; 92: 2159–2164.
Dao TL, Hoang VT, Gautret P. Recurrence of SARS CoV-2 viral RNA in recovered COVID-19 patients: a narrative review. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2020 Oct; 28: 1–13.
Grabarczyk P, Sulkowska E, Kopacz A, et al. SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostic. J Transf Med. 2021; 14: 10–18 1. https//
Carmo A, Pereira-Vaz J, Mota V, et al. Clearance and persistence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in patients with COVID-19. J Med Virol 2020, May; 92: 2227–2231. https://
Wang G, Yu N, Xiao W, et al. Consecutive false-negative rRT-PCR test results for SARS-CoV-2 in patients after clinical recovery from COVID-19. J Med Virol. 2020 Nov; 92(11): 2887–2890. Epub 2020 Jul 6.
Kang H, Wang Y, Tong, et al. Retest positive for SARS CoV 2 RNA of „recovered” patients with COVID-19: persistance, sampling issues, or re-infection?. Journal of Medical Virology.2020 Nov; 2020 Nov; 92(11): 2263–2265. Epub 2020 Jun 9.
Wikramaratna PS, Paton RS, Ghafari M, et al. Estimating the false-negative test probability of SARS CoV-2 by RT-PCR. 2020 Dec; 25(50): pii=2000568.–7....
He Y, Dong Y-C. A perspective on Re-Detectable Positive SARS CoV-2 Nucleic Acid Results in Recovered COVID-19 Patients. (access:2021.01.30).