Risk Factors Associated With Clinical Outcomes in 323 Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Hospitalized Patients in Wuhan, China

COVID-19 and COPD

As of 11 July, 2020, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has infected over 12.7 million people around the world and caused more than 560,000 deaths [1]. Given the devastating impact that COVID-19 can have on the lung, it is natural to fear for patients with underlying COPD. Estimating their excess risk for contracting COVID-19 and, in particular, its more severe respiratory manifestations has been a challenging exercise in this pandemic for various reasons. First, the reporting on cases has concentrated on hospitalised and intensive care unit (ICU) patients, rather than on mild, outpatient cases. This is in part also due to the variability in testing strategies across the world, where some nations with stricter testing requirements and scarce testing resources have focused on testing only those requiring hospitalisation.

COPD patients have increased risk of severe pneumonia and poor outcomes when they develop COVID-19. This may be related to poor underlying lung reserves or increased expression of ACE-2 receptor in small airways.https://bit.ly/37dSB8l

The effect of smoking on COVID-19 severity: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Various comorbidities represent risk factors for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). The impact of smoking on COVID‐19 severity has been previously reported in several meta‐analyses limited by small sample sizes and poor methodology. We aimed to rigorously and definitively quantify the effects of smoking on COVID‐19 severity. MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science were searched between 1 December 2019 and 2 June 2020. Studies reporting smoking status of hospitalized patients with different severities of disease and/or at least one clinical endpoint of interest (disease progression, intensive care unit admission, need for mechanical ventilation, and mortality) were included. Data were pooled using a random‐effects model. This study was registered on PROSPERO: CRD42020180920. We analyzed 47 eligible studies reporting on 32 849 hospitalized COVID‐19 patients, with 8417 (25.6%) reporting a smoking history, comprising 1501 current smokers, 5676 former smokers, and 1240 unspecified smokers. Current smokers had an increased risk of severe COVID‐19 (risk ratios [RR]: 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14‐2.85; P = .012), and severe or critical COVID‐19 (RR: 1.98; CI: 1.16‐3.38; P = .012). Patients with a smoking history had a significantly increased risk of severe COVID‐19 (RR: 1.31; CI: 1.12‐1.54; P = .001), severe or critical COVID‐19 (RR: 1.35; CI: 1.19‐1.53; P < .0001), in‐hospital mortality (RR: 1.26; CI: 1.20‐1.32; P < .0001), disease progression (RR: 2.18; CI: 1.06‐4.49; P = .035), and need for mechanical ventilation (RR: 1.20; CI: 1.01‐1.42; P = .043). Patients with any smoking history are vulnerable to severe COVID‐19 and worse in‐hospital outcomes. In the absence of current targeted therapies, preventative, and supportive strategies to reduce morbidity and mortality in current and former smokers are crucial.

The first high‐quality systematic review and meta‐analysis assessing the impact of smoking on COVID‐19 severity.

To date, the largest meta‐analysis among peer‐reviewed literature assessing the impact of smoking on COVID‐19 severity, including 32,849 hospitalised patients with COVID‐19.

Patients who were current smokers had an increased risk of severe COVID‐19 and severe or critical COVID‐19.

Patients with a smoking history had an increased risk of severe COVID‐19, severe or critical COVID‐19, in‐hospital mortality, disease progression and need for mechanical ventilation.

Acute kidney injury and kidney replacement therapy in COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) can affect hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with estimates ranging between 0.5% and 40%. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting incidence, mortality and risk factors for AKI in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

We systematically searched 11 electronic databases until 29 May 2020 for studies in English reporting original data on AKI and kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Incidences of AKI and KRT and risk ratios for mortality associated with AKI were pooled using generalized linear mixed and random-effects models. Potential risk factors for AKI were assessed using meta-regression. Incidences were stratified by geographic location and disease severity.

RESULTS

A total of 3042 articles were identified, of which 142 studies were included, with 49 048 hospitalized COVID-19 patients including 5152 AKI events. The risk of bias of included studies was generally low. The pooled incidence of AKI was 28.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 19.8-39.5] among hospitalized COVID-19 patients from the USA and Europe (20 studies) and 5.5% (95% CI 4.1-7.4) among patients from China (62 studies), whereas the pooled incidence of KRT was 7.7% (95% CI 5.1-11.4; 18 studies) and 2.2% (95% CI 1.5-3.3; 52 studies), respectively. Among patients admitted to the intensive care unit, the incidence of KRT was 20.6% (95% CI 15.7-26.7; 38 studies). Meta-regression analyses showed that age, male sex, cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, hypertension and chronic kidney disease were associated with the occurrence of AKI; in itself, AKI was associated with an increased risk of mortality, with a pooled risk ratio of 4.6 (95% CI 3.3-6.5).

CONCLUSIONS

AKI and KRT are common events in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, with estimates varying across geographic locations. Additional studies are needed to better understand the underlying mechanisms and optimal treatment of AKI in these patients.

Diabetes and COVID-19: A systematic review on the current evidences

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 pneumonia is a newly recognized illness that is spreading rapidly around the world and causes many disability and deaths. Some diseases, for instance diabetes, is continuously suggested as a risk factor which contributes to the severity and mortality of COVID-19. However, to date, there are no comprehensive studies aiming to explain the exact relationship between diabetes and COVID-19. Thus, this study aims to summarize the evidence about diabetes and COVID-19 outbreak through a systematic review and meta-analysis approach.

METHOD

A literature review was implemented within databases of Scopus, PubMed, Science direct, and Web of science. Observational reviews, case-report, and case-series studies that assessed the diabetes in COVID-19 patients, were included. Data extraction and assessment were guided by PRISMA checklist.

FINDINGS

Some studies suggest that there were no significant differences in symptoms between patients who suffered from both diabetes and COVID-19 and those who only suffered COVID-19. In the subsequent meta-analysis 14.5% of the subjects were diabetic patient. These clients have poor ARDS prognosis, severe symptoms, and the death rate is higher among COVID-19 patients. In addition, it is suggested the diabetic patients will be treated with antibiotics, antivirals, and HCQ.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study show that diabetes is a risk factor - and contributes to the severity and mortality of patients with COVID-19. This paper also provides recommendations and guidelines for which could be useful for prevention and treatment of diabetic patients affected by COVID-19.

Diabetes Epidemiology in the COVID-19 Pandemic

Diabetes has been identified as an important risk factor for mortality and rates of progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, many recent reports on this topic reflect hurried approaches and have lacked careful epidemiologic design, conduct, and analysis. Features of prior studies have posed problems for our understanding of the true contribution of diabetes and other underlying comorbidities to prognosis in COVID-19. In this Perspective, we discuss some of the challenges of interpreting the current literature on diabetes and COVID-19 and discuss opportunities for future epidemiologic studies. We contend that the COVID-19 pandemic is a defining moment for the field of epidemiology and that diabetes epidemiology should play a significant role.

Impact of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular diseases on mortality and severity of COVID-19-systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the latest evidence on the association between cerebrovascular, and cardiovascular diseases and poor outcome in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia.

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, SCOPUS, EuropePMC, and Cochrane Central Database. The outcome of interest was composite poor outcome that comprised of mortality and severe COVID-19.

RESULTS

A total of 4448 patients were obtained from 16 studies. Cerebrovascular disease was associated with an increased composite poor outcome (RR 2.04 [1.43,2.91], p<0.001; I2: 77%). Subgroup analysis revealed that cerebrovascular disease was associated with mortality (RR 2.38 [1.92,2.96], p<0.001; I2: 0%) and showed borderline significance for severe COVID-19 (RR 1.88 [1.00,3.51], p = 0.05; I2: 87%). Cardiovascular disease was associated with increased composite poor outcome (RR 2.23 [1.71,2.91], p<0.001; I2: 60%), mortality (RR 2.25 [1.53,3.29], p<0.001; I2: 33%) and severe COVID-19 (RR 2.25 [1.51,3.36], p<0.001; I2: 76%). Meta-regression demonstrate that the association was not influenced by gender, age, hypertension, diabetes, and respiratory comorbidities. Furthermore, the association between cerebrovascular disease and poor outcome was not affected by cardiovascular diseases and vice versa.

CONCLUSION

Cerebrovascular and cardiovascular diseases were associated with an increased risk for poor outcome in patients with COVID-19.

Incidence of myocardial injury in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a pooled analysis of 7,679 patients from 53 studies

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become global pandemic and resulted in considerable morbidity and mortality since December 2019. Information on the incidence of myocardial injury remains scarce.

METHODS

English-language databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane), Chinese-language databases (CNKI, VIP, WANFANG), and preprint platform were searched to identify studies that reported the myocardial injury data in COVID-19 patients. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to derive the pooled incidence and relative risks (RRs) of myocardial injury. Variations by disease severity were examined by subgroup analyses. Sensitivity analyses were performed to strengthen the results. Meta-regression was applied to explore the risk factors associated with myocardial injury.

RESULTS

A total of 53 studies involving 7,679 patients were included. The pooled incidence of myocardial injury was 21% [95% confidence interval (CI), 17-25%; I2, 96.5%]. The highest incidence of myocardial injury was found in non-survivors (66%; 95 CI%, 54-78%; I2, 85.7%), followed by severe patients (43%; 95 CI%, 33-53%; I2, 93.0%) and non-severe patients (11%; 95 CI%, 7-15%; I2, 95.2%). Higher risk of myocardial injury was detected in severe patients than non-severe patients (RR, 5.74; 95% CI, 3.74-8.79; I2, 86.8%). All the sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of primacy results.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that myocardial injury occurred in 21% of COVID-19 patients. An elevated rate was observed in non-survivors (66%) and severe patients (43%). Severe patients had a 4.74-fold increase in the risk of myocardial injury than non-severe patients. Aggressive strategy may be considered for COVID-19 patients at high risk of myocardial injury.

A model of disparities: risk factors associated with COVID-19 infection

BACKGROUND

By mid-May 2020, there were over 1.5 million cases of (SARS-CoV-2) or COVID-19 across the U.S. with new confirmed cases continuing to rise following the re-opening of most states. Prior studies have focused mainly on clinical risk factors associated with serious illness and mortality of COVID-19. Less analysis has been conducted on the clinical, sociodemographic, and environmental variables associated with initial infection of COVID-19.

METHODS

A multivariable statistical model was used to characterize risk factors in 34,503cases of laboratory-confirmed positive or negative COVID-19 infection in the Providence Health System (U.S.) between February 28 and April 27, 2020. Publicly available data were utilized as approximations for social determinants of health, and patient-level clinical and sociodemographic factors were extracted from the electronic medical record.

RESULTS

Higher risk of COVID-19 infection was associated with older age (OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.41-2.02, p < 0.0001), male gender (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.21-1.44, p < 0.0001), Asian race (OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.18-1.72, p = 0.0002), Black/African American race (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.25-1.83, p < 0.0001), Latino ethnicity (OR 2.07; 95% CI 1.77-2.41, p < 0.0001), non-English language (OR 2.09; 95% CI 1.7-2.57, p < 0.0001), residing in a neighborhood with financial insecurity (OR 1.10; 95% CI 1.01-1.25, p = 0.04), low air quality (OR 1.01; 95% CI 1.0-1.04, p = 0.05), housing insecurity (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.16-1.5, p < 0.0001) or transportation insecurity (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.02-1.23, p = 0.03), and living in senior living communities (OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.23-2.32, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

sisk of COVID-19 infection is higher among groups already affected by health disparities across age, race, ethnicity, language, income, and living conditions. Health promotion and disease prevention strategies should prioritize groups most vulnerable to infection and address structural inequities that contribute to risk through social and economic policy.

HIV/SARS-CoV-2 coinfection: A global perspective

Since its first appearance in Wuhan, China, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has rapidly spread throughout the world and has become a global pandemic. Several medical comorbidities have been identified as risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, it remains unclear whether people living with human immunodefeciency virus (PLWH) are at an increased risk of COVID-19 and severe disease manifestation, with controversial suggestion that HIV-infected individuals could be protected from severe COVID-19 by means of antiretroviral therapy or HIV-related immunosuppression. Several cases of coinfection with HIV and SARS-CoV-2 have been reported from different parts of the globe. This review seeks to provide a holistic overview of SARS-CoV-2 infection in PLWH.

COVID-19 and Smoking: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Evidence

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine if tobacco use in patients with Covid-19 is associated with a negative disease course and adverse outcome, and if smoking, current and past, is associated with a greater possibility of developing COVID-19.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) of previously published works were performed. The search strategy included all known descriptors for Covid-19 and tobacco and was conducted in different databases. Appropriate statistical models were used to address the effect size in meta-analysis, namely random effects and fixed effects model.

RESULTS

Thirty-four articles were identified in the SR of which 19 were included in the MA. Being a smoker or former smoker was shown to be a risk factor for worse progression of Covid-19 infection (OR 1.96, 95% CI, 1.36 - 2.83) and a greater probability of presenting a more critical condition (OR 1.79 95% CI, 1.19 - 2.70). As limitations of the MA, we found that most of the studies analyzed were observational with limited publication bias. Two studies that disagreed with the rest were included, although after withdrawing them from the MA, smoking was maintained as a risk factor for worse progress.

CONCLUSION

Current and past smoking produces a more serious clinical form of Covid-19 and more frequently leads to intensive care admission, intubation, and death.

Effects on QT interval of hydroxychloroquine associated with ritonavir/darunavir or azithromycin in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection

Introduction

Most of the drugs associations that have been used to treat patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection increase the risk of prolongation of the corrected QT interval (QTc).

Objective

To evaluate the effects of an association therapy of hydroxychloroquine (HY) plus ritonavir/darunavir (RD) or azithromycin (AZ) on QTc intervals.

Methods

At the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic patients admitted to our hospital were treated with the empiric association of HY/RD; one week later the therapeutic protocol was modified with the combination of HY/AZ. Patients underwent an ECG at baseline, then 3 and 7 days after starting therapy. We prospectively enrolled 113 patients (61 in the HY/RD group-52 in the HY/AZ group).

Results

A significant increase in median QTc was reported after seven days of therapy in both groups: from 438 to 452 ms in HY/RD patients; from 433 to 440 ms in HY/AZ patients (p = 0.001 for both). 23 patients (21.2%) had a QTc > 500 ms at 7 days. The risk of developing a QTc > 500 ms was greater in patients with prolonged baseline QTc values (≥ 440 ms for female and ≥ 460 ms for male patients) (OR 7.10 (95% IC 1.88–26.81); p = 0.004) and in patients with an increase in the QTc > 40 ms 3 days after onset of treatment (OR 30.15 (95% IC 6.96–130.55); p = 0.001). One patient per group suffered a malignant ventricular arrhythmia.

Conclusion

Hydroxychloroquine with both ritonavir/darunavir or azithromycin therapy significantly increased the QTc-interval at 7 days. The risk of developing malignant arrhythmias remained relatively low when these drugs were administered for a limited period of time.

Lopinavir-ritonavir for COVID-19: A living systematic review

Objective

Provide a timely, rigorous, and continuously updated summary of the evidence on the role of lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of patients with COVID-19.

Methods

We conducted searches in the special L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19, a system that performs regular searches in PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and other 33 sources. We searched for randomized trials and non-randomized studies evaluating the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Two reviewers independently evaluated potentially eligible studies, according to predefined selection criteria, and extracted data using a predesigned standardized form. We performed meta-analyses using random-effect models and assessed overall certainty in evidence using the GRADE approach. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

Our search strategy yielded 862 references. Finally, we identified 12 studies, including two randomized trials, evaluating lopinavir/ritonavir, in addition to standard care versus standard care alone in 250 adult inpatients with COVID-19. The evidence from randomized trials shows lopinavir/ritonavir may reduce mortality (relative risk: 0.77; 95% confidence interval: 0.45 to 1.3; low certainty evidence), but the anticipated magnitude of the absolute reduction in mortality, varies across different risk groups. Lopinavir/ritonavir also had a slight reduction in the risk of requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, developing respiratory failure, or acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, it did not lead to any difference in the duration of hospitalization and may lead to an increase in the number of total adverse effects. The overall certainty of the evidence was low or very low.

Conclusions

For severe and critical patients with COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir might play a role in improving outcomes, but the available evidence is still limited. A substantial number of ongoing studies should provide valuable evidence to inform researchers and decision-makers soon.

Multiorgan Failure With Emphasis on Acute Kidney Injury and Severity of COVID-19: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Abnormalities in hematologic, biochemical, and immunologic biomarkers have been shown to be associated with severity and mortality in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Therefore, early evaluation and monitoring of both liver and kidney functions, as well as hematologic parameters, are pivotal to forecast the progression of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES

In this study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the association between several complications, including acute kidney injury (AKI), acute liver injury (ALI), and coagulopathy, with poor outcomes in COVID-19.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Observational studies reporting AKI, ALI, and coagulopathy along with the outcomes of clinically validated death, severe COVID-19, or intensive care unit (ICU) care were included in this study. The exclusion criteria were abstract-only publications, review articles, commentaries, letters, case reports, non-English language articles, and studies that did not report key exposures or outcomes of interest.

PATIENTS

Adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19.

MEASUREMENTS

Data extracted included author, year, study design, age, sex, cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, respiratory comorbidities, chronic kidney disease, mortality, severe COVID-19, and need for ICU care.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search from PubMed, SCOPUS, EuropePMC, and the Cochrane Central Database. AKI and ALI follow the definition of the included studies. Coagulopathy refers to the coagulopathy or disseminated intravascular coagulation defined in the included studies. The outcome of interest was a composite of mortality, need for ICU care, and severe COVID-19. We used random-effects models regardless of heterogeneity to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous variables. Heterogeneity was assessed using I 2. Random effects meta-regression was conducted for comorbidities and the analysis was performed for one covariate at a time.

RESULTS

There were 3615 patients from 15 studies. The mean Newcastle-Ottawa scale of the included studies was 7.3 ± 1.2. The AKI was associated with an increased the composite outcome (RR: 10.55 [7.68, 14.50], P < .001; I 2: 0%). Subgroup analysis showed that AKI was associated with increased mortality (RR: 13.38 [8.15, 21.95], P < .001; I 2: 24%), severe COVID-19 (RR: 8.12 [4.43, 14.86], P < .001; I 2: 0%), and the need for ICU care (RR: 5.90 [1.32, 26.35], P = .02; I 2: 0%). The ALI was associated with increased mortality (RR: 4.02 [1.51, 10.68], P = .005; I 2: 88%) in COVID-19. Mortality was higher in COVID-19 with coagulopathy (RR: 7.55 [3.24, 17.59], P < .001; I 2: 69%). The AKI was associated with the composite outcome and was not influenced by age (P = .182), sex (P = .104), hypertension (P = .788), cardiovascular diseases (P = .068), diabetes (P = .097), respiratory comorbidity (P = .762), and chronic kidney disease (P = .77).

LIMITATIONS

There are several limitations of this study. Many of these studies did not define the extent of AKI (grade), which may affect the outcome. Acute liver injury and coagulopathy were not defined in most of the studies. The definition of severe COVID-19 differed across studies. Several articles included in the study were published at preprint servers and are not yet peer-reviewed. Most of the studies were from China; thus, some patients might overlap across the reports. Most of the included studies were retrospective in design.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that the presence of AKI, ALI, and coagulopathy was associated with poor outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Diabetes and COVID-19

According to previous reports, diabetes seems to be a risk factor which worsens the serious clinical events caused by COVID-19. But is diabetes per se a risk factor that increases the probability of getting the virus? This paper will discuss this point. There are not many research data on antidiabetic drugs in this context. The potential influence of glucose-lowering agents on the severity of COVID-19 has not been described yet. Dipeptidylpeptidase-4 (DPP-4) is a cell surface protein ubiquitously expressed in many tissues and it is also a soluble molecule found in serum/plasma fluids. DPP-4 is involved in infection of cells by some viruses. This paper reviews data about the use of DPP-4 inhibitors and others diabetes drugs on COVID-19 patients. As such, no available evidence has yet suggested that glucose-lowering drugs - including those targeting DPP4-related pathways - produce any significant harm or benefit in the context of human infections. However, insulin must remain the first-choice agent in the management of critically ill-hospitalized patients, while it is recommended to suspend other agents in unstable patients. This paper provides related French and international recommendations for people with diabetes who got infected by COVID-19 and upholds that infections may alter glucose control and may require additional vigilance.

Multi-organ Dysfunction in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This study aimed to provide systematic evidence for the association between multiorgan dysfunction and COVID-19 development. Several online databases were searched for articles published until May 13, 2020. Two investigators independently selected trials, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of individual trials. Single-arm meta-analysis was performed to summarize the clinical features of confirmed COVID-19 patients. Fixed effects meta-analysis was performed for clinically relevant parameters that were closely related to the patients' various organ functions. A total of 73 studies, including 171,108 patients, were included in this analysis. The overall incidence of severe COVID-19 and mortality were 24% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20%-28%) and 2% (95% CI, 1%-3%), respectively. Patients with hypertension (odds ratio [OR] = 2.40; 95% CI, 2.08-2.78), cardiovascular disease (CVD) (OR = 3.54; 95% CI, 2.68-4.68), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (OR=3.70; 95% CI, 2.93-4.68), chronic liver disease (CLD) (OR=1.48; 95% CI, 1.09-2.01), chronic kidney disease (CKD) (OR = 1.84; 95% CI, 1.47-2.30), chronic cerebrovascular diseases (OR = 2.53; 95% CI, 1.84-3.49) and chronic gastrointestinal (GI) disease (OR = 2.13; 95% CI, 1.12-4.05) were more likely to develop severe COVID-19. Increased levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), creatine kinase (CK), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI), myoglobin, creatinine, urea, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and total bilirubin were highly associated with severe COVID-19. The incidence of acute organ injuries, including acute cardiac injury (ACI); (OR = 11.87; 95% CI, 7.64-18.46), acute kidney injury (AKI); (OR=10.25; 95% CI, 7.60-13.84), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); (OR=27.66; 95% CI, 18.58-41.18), and acute cerebrovascular diseases (OR=9.22; 95% CI, 1.61-52.72) was more common in patients with severe COVID-19 than in patients with non-severe COVID-19. Patients with a history of organ dysfunction are more susceptible to severe conditions. COVID-19 can aggravate an acute multiorgan injury.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of the first 63 adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19: An experience from Oman

INTRODUCTION

To identify the clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Oman.

METHODS

A case series of hospitalized COVID-19 laboratory-confirmed patients between February 24th through April 24th, 2020, from two hospitals in Oman. Analyses were performed using univariate statistics.

RESULTS

The cohort included 63 patients with an overall mean age of 48±16 years and 84% (n=53) were males. A total of 38% (n=24) of the hospitalized patients were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). Fifty one percent (n=32) of patients had at least one co-morbidity with diabetes mellitus (DM) (32%; n=20) and hypertension (32%; n=20) as the most common co-morbidities followed by chronic heart and renal diseases (12.8%; n=8). The most common presenting symptoms at onset of illness were fever (84%; n=53), cough (75%; n=47) and shortness of breaths (59%; n=37). All except two patients (97%; n=61) were treated with either chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine, while the three most prescribed antibiotics were ceftriaxone (79%; n=50), azithromycin (71%; n=45), and the piperacillin/tazobactam combination (49%; n=31). A total of 59% (n=37), 49% (n=31) and 24% (n=15) of the patients were on lopinavir/ritonavir, interferons, or steroids, respectively. Mortality was documented in (8%; n=5) of the patients while 68% (n=43) of the study cohort recovered. Mortality was associated with those that were admitted to ICU (19% vs 0; p=0.009), mechanically ventilated (31% vs 0; p=0.001), had DM (20% vs 2.3%; p=0.032), older (62 vs 47 years; p=0.045), had high total bilirubin (43% vs 2.3%; p=0.007) and those with high C-reactive protein (186 vs 90mg/dL; p=0.009) and low corrected calcium (15% vs 0%; p=0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

ICU admission, those on mechanical ventilation, the elderly, those with high total bilirubin and low corrected calcium were associated with high mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

The impact of 2019 novel coronavirus on heart injury: A Systematic review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence about COVID-19 on cardiac injury is inconsistent.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to summarize available data on severity differences in acute cardiac injury and acute cardiac injury with mortality during the COVID-19 outbreak.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search across Pubmed, Embase and pre-print from December 1, 2019 to March 27, 2020, to identify all observational studies that reported cardiac specific biomarkers (troponin, creatine kinase-MB fraction, myoglobin, or NT-proBNP) during COVID-19 infection. We extracted data on patient demographics, infection severity, comorbidity history, and biomarkers during COVID-19 infection. Where possible, data were pooled for meta-analysis with standard (SMD) or weighted (WMD) mean difference and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

We included 4189 confirmed COVID-19 infected patients from 28 studies. More severe COVID-19 infection is associated with higher mean troponin (SMD 0.53, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.75, p < 0.001), with a similar trend for creatine kinase-MB, myoglobin, and NT-proBNP. Acute cardiac injury was more frequent in those with severe, compared to milder, disease (risk ratio 5.99, 3.04 to 11.80; p < 0.001). Meta regression suggested that cardiac injury biomarker differences of severity are related to history of hypertension (p = 0.030). Also COVID19-related cardiac injury is associated with higher mortality (summary risk ratio 3.85, 2.13 to 6.96; p < 0.001). hsTnI and NT-proBNP levels increased during the course of hospitalization only in non-survivors.

CONCLUSION

The severity of COVID-19 is associated with acute cardiac injury, and acute cardiac injury is associated with death. Cardiac injury biomarkers mainly increase in non-survivors. This highlights the need to effectively monitor heart health to prevent myocarditis in patients infected with COVID-19.

Current smoking, former smoking, and adverse outcome among hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence and effects of current smoking on adverse outcomes among hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature (PubMed) identified 18 (from a total of 1398) relevant studies. Pooled current smoking prevalence was compared with the gender-adjusted and gender and age-adjusted, population-based expected prevalence by calculating prevalence odds ratio (POR). The association between current, compared with non-current and former, smoking and adverse outcome was examined. A secondary analysis was performed by including 12 pre-publications (30 studies in total). All analyses were performed using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Among 6515 patients, the pooled prevalence of current smoking was 6.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 4.8-9.1%]. The gender-adjusted POR was 0.20 (95% CI: 0.16-0.25, p < 0.001), and the gender and age-adjusted POR was 0.24 (95% CI: 0.19-0.30, p < 0.001). Current smokers were more likely to have an adverse outcome compared with non-current smokers [odds ratio (OR): 1.53, 95%CI: 1.06-2.20, p = 0.022] but less likely compared with former smokers (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.27-0.74, p = 0.003). When pre-publications were added (n = 10,631), the gender-adjusted POR was 0.27 (95% CI: 0.19-0.38, p < 0.001) and the gender and age-adjusted POR was 0.34 (95% CI: 0.24-0.48, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis of retrospective observational case series found an unexpectedly low prevalence of current smoking among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Hospitalized current smokers had higher odds compared with non-current smokers but lower odds compared with former smokers for an adverse outcome. Smoking cannot be considered a protective measure for COVID-19. However, the hypothesis that nicotine may have a protective effect in COVID-19 that is partially masked by smoking-related toxicity and by the abrupt cessation of nicotine intake when smokers are hospitalized should be explored in laboratory studies and clinical trials using pharmaceutical nicotine products.

Management of Osteoarthritis During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The pandemic spread of the new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) infection in China first, and all over the world at present, has become a global health emergency due to the rapidly increasing number of affected patients. Currently, a clear relationship between COVID‐19 infection incidence and/or complications due to chronic or occasional treatments for other pathologies is still not clear, albeit the COVID‐19 pandemic may condition the treatment strategy of complex disorders, such as osteoarthritis (OA). Importantly, OA is the most common age‐related joint disease, affecting more than 80% of people older than the age of 55, an age burden also shared with the highest severity in COVID‐19 patients. OA patients often show a large array of concomitant pathologies, such as diabetes, inflammation, and cardiovascular diseases that are again shared with COVID‐19 patients and may therefore increase complications. Moreover, different OA treatments, such as NSAIDs, paracetamol, corticosteroids, opioids, or other molecules have a wide array of iatrogenic effects, potentially increasing COVID‐19 secondary infection incidence or complications. In this review we critically analyze the evidence on either negative or positive effects of drugs commonly used to manage OA in this particular scenario. This would provide orthopedic surgeons in particular, and physicians, pharmacologists, and clinicians in general, a comprehensive description about the safety of the current pharmacological approaches and a decision‐making tool to treat their OA patients as the coronavirus pandemic continues.

Prevalence and impact of acute renal impairment on COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to assess the prevalence of abnormal urine analysis and kidney dysfunction in COVID-19 patients and to determine the association of acute kidney injury (AKI) with the severity and prognosis of COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

The electronic database of Embase and PubMed were searched for relevant studies. A meta-analysis of eligible studies that reported the prevalence of abnormal urine analysis and kidney dysfunction in COVID-19 was performed. The incidences of AKI were compared between severe versus non-severe patients and survivors versus non-survivors.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies involving 4963 confirmed COVID-19 patients were included. The proportions of patients with elevation of sCr and BUN levels were 9.6% (95% CI 5.7-13.5%) and 13.7% (95% CI 5.5-21.9%), respectively. Of all patients, 57.2% (95% CI 40.6-73.8%) had proteinuria, 38.8% (95% CI 26.3-51.3%) had proteinuria +, and 10.6% (95% CI 7.9-13.3%) had proteinuria ++ or +++. The overall incidence of AKI in all COVID-19 patients was 4.5% (95% CI 3.0-6.0%), while the incidence of AKI was 1.3% (95% CI 0.2-2.4%), 2.8% (95% CI 1.4-4.2%), and 36.4% (95% CI 14.6-58.3%) in mild or moderate cases, severe cases, and critical cases, respectively. Meanwhile, the incidence of AKI was 52.9%(95% CI 34.5-71.4%), 0.7% (95% CI - 0.3-1.8%) in non-survivors and survivors, respectively. Continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) was required in 5.6% (95% CI 2.6-8.6%) severe patients, 0.1% (95% CI - 0.1-0.2%) non-severe patients and 15.6% (95% CI 10.8-20.5%) non-survivors and 0.4% (95% CI - 0.2-1.0%) survivors, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of abnormal urine analysis and kidney dysfunction in COVID-19 was high and AKI is closely associated with the severity and prognosis of COVID-19 patients. Therefore, it is important to increase awareness of kidney dysfunction in COVID-19 patients.

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An overview

By the end of May 2020, SARS-CoV-2 pandemic caused more than 350,000 deaths worldwide. In the first months, there have been uncertainties on almost any area: infection transmission route, virus origin and persistence in the environment, diagnostic tests, therapeutic approach, high-risk subjects, lethality, and containment policies. We provide an updated summary of the current knowledge on the pandemic, discussing the available evidence on the effectiveness of the adopted mitigation strategies.

COVID-19 pandemic: Its impact on liver disease and liver transplantation

Severe pulmonary disease caused by the novel coronavirus [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)], has devastated many countries around the world. It has overwhelmed the medical system. The priorities of many institutions have changed to manage critically ill corona virus infectious disease-2019 (COVID-19) patients, which affected the working style of many departments. Hepatologists and transplant surgeons look after a very sensitive patient group. Patients with liver disease need special attention and continuous follow-up. Similarly, transplant candidates also need special care. Healthcare professionals in the field of hepatology face the overwhelming task of taking care of COVID-19 patients with hepatic complications, liver disease or transplant patients who are SARS-CoV-2 positive, and the patients on routine surveillance who do not have COVID-19. This review will evaluate COVID-19 from the perspective of its effect on the liver and its possible effects on patients with liver disease. Furthermore, the level of care for liver transplant recipients during the pandemic will be discussed.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2): a global pandemic and treatment strategies

The emergence and rapid spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), a potentially fatal disease, is swiftly leading to public health crises worldwide. The origin of SARS-CoV-2 infection was first reported in people exposed to a seafood market in Wuhan City, China in December 2019. It has been suggested that the infection is likely to be of zoonotic origin and transmitted to humans through a not-yet-known intermediary. As of 22 May 2020, the World Health Organization reported that there were approximately 4,995,996 confirmed cases and 327,821 deaths. SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted via inhalation or direct contact with droplets from infected people. It has an incubation period ranging from 2 to ≥14 days. The rate of spread of SARS-CoV-2 is greater than that for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus and Middle East respiratory coronavirus. The symptoms are similar to influenza (i.e. breathlessness, sore throat and fatigue) and infected cases are isolated and treated. Infection is mild in most cases, but in elderly (>50 years) patients and those with cardiac and respiratory disorders, it may progress to pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome and multi-organ failure. People with strong immunity or those who have developed herd immunity are asymptomatic. The fatality rate ranges from 3% to 4%. Recommended methods for diagnosis of COVID-19 are molecular tests (e.g. polymerase chain reaction) on respiratory secretions, chest scan and common laboratory diagnosis. Currently, treatment is essentially supportive, and the role of antiviral agents is yet to be established as a vaccine is not yet available. This review will focus on epidemiology, symptoms, transmission, pathogenesis, ongoing available treatments and future perspectives of SARS-CoV-2.

Cardiac injuries in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic worsens, this global pandemic is impacting more than 200 countries/regions and more than 4,500,000 confirmed cases worldwide. COVID-19 is caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), which might attack not only the respiratory system, but also the other important organs, including the heart. It was reported that COVID-19 patients with a past history of cardiovascular diseases would have a higher mortality. Meanwhile, elevated troponin levels were frequently observed in COVID-19 cases. Besides the comprehensive treatments for COVID-19, as a cardiologist, we should also remain vigilant about the cardiac injuries, especially those with severe emergent cardiovascular symptoms.

•

Cardiac injury is a common co-morbidity in COVID-19 patients.

•

Myocarditis, especially fulminant myocarditis might be also induced by SARS-CoV-2.

•

Larger cohorts are required to illustrate the roles of COVID-19 in cardiac injury.

Cigarette Smoke Exposure and Inflammatory Signaling Increase the Expression of the SARS-CoV-2 Receptor ACE2 in the Respiratory Tract

The factors mediating fatal SARS-CoV-2 infections are poorly understood. Here, we show that cigarette smoke causes a dose-dependent upregulation of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), the SARS-CoV-2 receptor, in rodent and human lungs. Using single-cell sequencing data, we demonstrate that ACE2 is expressed in a subset of secretory cells in the respiratory tract. Chronic smoke exposure triggers the expansion of this cell population and a concomitant increase in ACE2 expression. In contrast, quitting smoking decreases the abundance of these secretory cells and reduces ACE2 levels. Finally, we demonstrate that ACE2 expression is responsive to inflammatory signaling and can be upregulated by viral infections or interferon treatment. Taken together, these results may partially explain why smokers are particularly susceptible to severe SARS-CoV-2 infections. Furthermore, our work identifies ACE2 as an interferon-stimulated gene in lung cells, suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 infections could create positive feedback loops that increase ACE2 levels and facilitate viral dissemination.

Establishing a model for predicting the outcome of COVID-19 based on combination of laboratory tests

Introduction

There are currently no satisfactory methods for predicting the outcome of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this study is to establish a model for predicting the prognosis of the disease.

Methods

The laboratory results were collected from 54 deceased COVID-19 patients on admission and before death. Another 54 recovered COVID-19 patients were enrolled as control cases.

Results

Many laboratory indicators, such as neutrophils, AST, γ-GT, ALP, LDH, NT-proBNP, Hs-cTnT, PT, APTT, D-dimer, IL-2R, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, TNF-α, CRP, ferritin and procalcitonin, were all significantly increased in deceased patients compared with recovered patients on admission. In contrast, other indicators such as lymphocytes, platelets, total protein and albumin were significantly decreased in deceased patients on admission. Some indicators such as neutrophils and procalcitonin, others such as lymphocytes and platelets, continuously increased or decreased from admission to death in deceased patients respectively. Using these indicators alone had moderate performance in differentiating between recovered and deceased COVID-19 patients. A model based on combination of four indicators (P = 1/[1 + e^{−(−2.658+0.587×neutrophils – 2.087×lymphocytes – 0.01×platelets+0.004×IL−2R)}]) showed good performance in predicting the death of COVID-19 patients. When cutoff value of 0.572 was used, the sensitivity and specificity of the prediction model were 90.74% and 94.44%, respectively.

Conclusions

Using the current indicators alone is of modest value in differentiating between recovered and deceased COVID-19 patients. A prediction model based on combination of neutrophils, lymphocytes, platelets and IL-2R shows good performance in predicting the outcome of COVID-19.

Management and Treatment of COVID-19: The Chinese Experience

With more than 1,800,000 cases and 110,000 deaths globally, COVID-19 is one of worst infectious disease outbreaks in history. This paper provides a critical review of the available evidence regarding the lessons learned from the Chinese experience with COVID-19 prevention and management. The steps that have led to a near disappearance of new cases in China included rapid sequencing of the virus to establish testing kits, which allowed tracking of infected persons in and out of Wuhan. In addition, aggressive quarantine measures included the complete isolation of Wuhan and then later Hubei Province and the rest of the country, as well as closure of all schools and nonessential businesses. Other measures included the rapid construction of two new hospitals and the establishment of "Fangcang" shelter hospitals. In the absence of a vaccine, the management of COVID-19 included antivirals, high-flow oxygen, mechanical ventilation, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, interferons, intravenous immunoglobulin, and convalescent plasma infusions. These measures appeared to provide only moderate success. Although some measures have been supported by weak descriptive data, their effectiveness is still unclear pending well controlled clinical trials. In the end, it was the enforcement of drastic quarantine measures that stopped SARS-CoV-2 from spreading. The earlier the implementation, the less likely resources will be depleted. The most critical factors in stopping a pandemic are early recognition of infected individuals, carriers, and contacts and early implementation of quarantine measures with an organised, proactive, and unified strategy at a national level. Delays result in significantly higher death tolls.

C-Reactive Protein Concentration in Steady-State Bronchiectasis: Prognostic Value of Future Severe Exacerbations. Data From the Spanish Registry of Bronchiectasis (RIBRON)

BACKGROUND

Both systemic inflammation and exacerbations have been associated with greater severity of bronchiectasis. Our objective was to analyze the prognostic value of the peripheral concentration of C-reactive protein (CRP) for the number and severity of exacerbations in patients with bronchiectasis.

METHODS

Patients from the Spanish Bronchiectasis Registry (RIBRON) with valid data on their CRP value (in a clinically stable phase) and valid data on exacerbations during the first year of follow-up were included. A logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the prognostic value of the CRP concentration (divided into tertiles) with the presence of at least one severe exacerbation or at least two mild-moderate exacerbations during the first year of follow-up.

RESULTS

802 patients (mean age: 68.1 [11.1 years], 65% female) were included. Of these, 33.8% and 13%, respectively, presented ≥2 mild-moderate exacerbations or at least one severe exacerbation during the first year of follow-up. The mean value of the CRP was 6.5 (17.6mg/L). Patients with a CRP value between 0.4 and 2.7mg/L (second tertile) and ≥2.7mg/L (third tertile) presented a 2.9 (95%CI: 1.4-5.9) and 4.2 (95%CI: 2.2-8.2) times greater probability, respectively, of experiencing a severe exacerbation than those with <0.4mg/L (control group), regardless of bronchiectasis severity or a history of previous exacerbations. However, the CRP value did not present any prognostic value for the number of mild-moderate exacerbations.

CONCLUSIONS

The CRP value was associated with a greater risk of future severe exacerbations but not with mild or moderate exacerbations in patients with steady-state bronchiectasis.

Hypertension is associated with increased mortality and severity of disease in COVID-19 pneumonia: A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between hypertension and outcome in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search from several databases on studies that assess hypertension and outcome in COVID-19. Composite of poor outcome, comprising of mortality, severe COVID-19, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), need for intensive care unit (ICU) care and disease progression were the outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 6560 patients were pooled from 30 studies. Hypertension was associated with increased composite poor outcome (risk ratio (RR) 2.11 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.85, 2.40), p < 0.001; I2, 44%) and its sub-group, including mortality (RR 2.21 (1.74, 2.81), p < 0.001; I2, 66%), severe COVID-19 (RR 2.04 (1.69, 2.47), p < 0.001; I2 31%), ARDS (RR 1.64 (1.11, 2.43), p = 0.01; I2,0%, p = 0.35), ICU care (RR 2.11 (1.34, 3.33), p = 0.001; I2 18%, p = 0.30), and disease progression (RR 3.01 (1.51, 5.99), p = 0.002; I2 0%, p = 0.55). Meta-regression analysis showed that gender (p = 0.013) was a covariate that affects the association. The association was stronger in studies with a percentage of males < 55% compared to ⩾ 55% (RR 2.32 v. RR 1.79).

CONCLUSION

Hypertension was associated with increased composite poor outcome, including mortality, severe COVID-19, ARDS, need for ICU care and disease progression in patients with COVID-19.

Characteristics of viral specimens collected from asymptomatic and fatal cases of COVID-19

We sought to determine the characteristics of viral specimens associated with fatal cases, asymptomatic cases and non-fatal symptomatic cases of COVID-19. This included the analysis of 1264 specimens found reactive for at least two SARS-CoV-2 specific loci from people screened for infection in Northern Nevada in March-May of 2020. Of these, 30 were specimens from fatal cases, while 23 were from positive, asymptomatic cases. We assessed the relative amounts of SARS-CoV-2 RNA from sample swabs by real-time PCR and use of the threshold crossing value (Ct). Moreover, we compared the amount of human RNase P found on the same swabs. A considerably higher viral load was found to be associated with swabs from cases involving fatality and the difference was found to be strongly statistically significant. Noting this difference, we sought to assess whether any genetic correlation could be found in association with virus from fatal cases using whole genome sequencing. While no common genetic elements were discerned, one branch of epidemiologically linked fatal cases did have two point mutations, which no other of 156 sequenced cases from northern Nevada had. The mutations caused amino acid changes in the 3′-5′ exonuclease protein, and the product of the gene, orf8.

C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, D-dimer, and ferritin in severe coronavirus disease-2019: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients critically ill with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) feature hyperinflammation, and the associated biomarkers may be beneficial for risk stratification. We aimed to investigate the association between several biomarkers, including serum C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), D-dimer, and serum ferritin, and COVID-19 severity.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive systematic literature search through electronic databases. The outcome of interest for this study was the composite poor outcome, which comprises mortality, acute respiratory distress syndrome, need for care in an intensive care unit, and severe COVID-19.

RESULTS

A total of 5350 patients were pooled from 25 studies. Elevated CRP was associated with an increased composite poor outcome [risk ratio (RR) 1.84 (1.45, 2.33), p < 0.001; I2: 96%] and its severe COVID-19 (RR 1.41; I2: 93%) subgroup. A CRP ⩾10 mg/L has a 51% sensitivity, 88% specificity, likelihood ratio (LR) + of 4.1, LR- of 0.5, and an area under curve (AUC) of 0.84. An elevated PCT was associated with an increased composite poor outcome [RR 3.92 (2.42, 6.35), p < 0.001; I2: 85%] and its mortality (RR 6.26; I2: 96%) and severe COVID-19 (RR 3.93; I2: 63%) subgroups. A PCT ⩾0.5 ng/ml has an 88% sensitivity, 68% specificity, LR+ of 2.7, LR- of 0.2, and an AUC of 0.88. An elevated D-dimer was associated with an increased composite poor outcome [RR 2.93 (2.14, 4.01), p < 0.001; I2: 77%], including its mortality (RR 4.15; I2: 83%) and severe COVID-19 (RR 2.42; I2: 58%) subgroups. A D-dimer >0.5 mg/L has a 58% sensitivity, 69% specificity, LR+ of 1.8, LR- of 0.6, and an AUC of 0.69. Patients with a composite poor outcome had a higher serum ferritin with a standardized mean difference of 0.90 (0.64, 1.15), p < 0.0001; I2: 76%.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that an elevated serum CRP, PCT, D-dimer, and ferritin were associated with a poor outcome in COVID-19. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Factors associated with disease severity and mortality among patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Understanding the factors associated with disease severity and mortality in Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is imperative to effectively triage patients. We performed a systematic review to determine the demographic, clinical, laboratory and radiological factors associated with severity and mortality in COVID-19.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase and WHO database for English language articles from inception until May 8, 2020. We included Observational studies with direct comparison of clinical characteristics between a) patients who died and those who survived or b) patients with severe disease and those without severe disease. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two authors independently.

RESULTS

Among 15680 articles from the literature search, 109 articles were included in the analysis. The risk of mortality was higher in patients with increasing age, male gender (RR 1.45, 95%CI 1.23-1.71), dyspnea (RR 2.55, 95%CI 1.88-2.46), diabetes (RR 1.59, 95%CI 1.41-1.78), hypertension (RR 1.90, 95%CI 1.69-2.15). Congestive heart failure (OR 4.76, 95%CI 1.34-16.97), hilar lymphadenopathy (OR 8.34, 95%CI 2.57-27.08), bilateral lung involvement (OR 4.86, 95%CI 3.19-7.39) and reticular pattern (OR 5.54, 95%CI 1.24-24.67) were associated with severe disease. Clinically relevant cut-offs for leukocytosis(>10.0 x109/L), lymphopenia(< 1.1 x109/L), elevated C-reactive protein(>100mg/L), LDH(>250U/L) and D-dimer(>1mg/L) had higher odds of severe disease and greater risk of mortality.

CONCLUSION

Knowledge of the factors associated of disease severity and mortality identified in our study may assist in clinical decision-making and critical-care resource allocation for patients with COVID-19.

The protease inhibitor lopinavir, boosted with ritonavir, as treatment for COVID-19: a rapid review

BACKGROUND

The HIV protease inhibitor lopinavir, boosted with ritonavir, has been used off-label to treat COVID-19. We aimed to synthesize the clinical evidence for lopinavir/ritonavir as a treatment for COVID-19.

METHODS

We performed a rapid review by searching databases including PubMed, GoogleScholar, medRxiv, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, for COVID-19 studies comparing outcomes between patients who did and did not receive lopinavir/ritonavir. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria.

RESULTS

We identified five completed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 14 retrospective cohort studies. Two large RCTs of 5,040 and 2,771 hospitalized adults with COVID-19 found no evidence that lopinavir/ritonavir influenced the primary outcome of mortality, or secondary outcomes including progression to mechanical ventilation or time to discharge. Results remained similar in all sub-group analyses including by age, gender, baseline ventilation and time since symptom onset. The three smaller RCTs (n=86-199) also found no evidence of a benefit in the primary outcomes of time to clinical improvement or time to viral clearance. The 14 observational studies included between 50 and 415 participants, and were limited by a lack of adjustment for potential confounding variables. The majority of these studies found no evidence that lopinavir/ritonavir was associated with improved mortality or other clinical outcomes, although results regarding viral clearance were mixed.

CONCLUSIONS

Good evidence from large clinical trials does not support using lopinavir/ritonavir to treat COVID-19 amongst hospitalized patients.