Characteristics and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients in an underserved-inner city population: A single tertiary center cohort

Consequence of COVID-19 on allergic asthma outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Asthma is a common chronic lung disease, and COVID-19 pandemic as a respiratory viral disease led to lung infection and resulted in millions of deaths. So, the impact of COVID-19 on asthma outcomes and the risk of being infected or hospitalized should be clarified. Systematic review and meta-analysis on the outcomes and risk of asthma for people with COVID-19 was done by searching electronic databases between 1 December 2019 and 31 July 2023. A total of 48 studies from 27 countries spread across all continents were included in the review. The prevalence of asthma among COVID-19 patients was 7.9%, and the analysis demonstrated a 16.5% reduction in the risk ratio for acquiring COVID-19 among subjects with asthma compared to those without asthma. There was no statistically significant difference in hospitalization risk, ICU admission risk, and death risk for COVID-19 patients with no asthma compared to those with asthma. The risk of death from COVID-19 was similar between nonasthmatics and asthmatics. The findings indicated that subjects with asthma may be at a lower risk of having infection with COVID-19 compared to those without asthma, but they have a similar risk of hospitalization and mortality.

Association between number of vasopressors and mortality in COVID-19 patients

Study objective

Study the clinical outcomes associated with the number of concomitant vasopressors used in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Design

A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients admitted with COVID-19 to the intensive care unit (ICU) between March and October 2020.

Setting

Rush University Medical Center, United States.

Participants

Adult patients at least 18 years old with COVID-19 with continuous infusion of any vasopressors were included.

Main outcome measures

60-day mortality in COVID-19 patients by the number of concurrent vasopressors received.

Results

A total of 637 patients met our inclusion criteria, of whom 338 (53.1 %) required the support of at least one vasopressor. When compared to patients with no vasopressor requirement, those who required 1 vasopressor (V1) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.27, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.86-5.79, p < 0.01) (n = 137), 2 vasopressors (V2) (aOR 4.71, 95 % CI 2.54-8.77, p < 0.01) (n = 86), 3 vasopressors (V3) (aOR 26.2, 95 % CI 13.35-53.74 p < 0.01) (n = 74), and 4 or 5 vasopressors(V4-5) (aOR 106.38, 95 % CI 39.17-349.93, p < 0.01) (n = 41) were at increased risk of 60-day mortality. In-hospital mortality for patients who received no vasopressors was 6.7 %, 22.6 % for V1, 27.9 % for V2, 62.2 % for V3, and 78 % for V4-V5.

Conclusion

Critically ill patients with COVID-19 requiring vasopressors were associated with significantly higher 60-day mortality.

Association of Obesity With COVID-19 Severity and Mortality: An Updated Systemic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression

Background

Obesity affects the course of critical illnesses. We aimed to estimate the association of obesity with the severity and mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.

Data Sources

A systematic search was conducted from the inception of the COVID-19 pandemic through to 13 October 2021, on databases including Medline (PubMed), Embase, Science Web, and Cochrane Central Controlled Trials Registry. Preprint servers such as BioRxiv, MedRxiv, ChemRxiv, and SSRN were also scanned.

Study Selection and Data Extraction

Full-length articles focusing on the association of obesity and outcome in COVID-19 patients were included. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were used for study selection and data extraction. Our Population of interest were COVID-19 positive patients, obesity is our Intervention/Exposure point, Comparators are Non-obese vs obese patients The chief outcome of the study was the severity of the confirmed COVID-19 positive hospitalized patients in terms of admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) or the requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation/intubation with obesity. All-cause mortality in COVID-19 positive hospitalized patients with obesity was the secondary outcome of the study.

Results

In total, 3,140,413 patients from 167 studies were included in the study. Obesity was associated with an increased risk of severe disease (RR=1.52, 95% CI 1.41-1.63, p<0.001, I2 = 97%). Similarly, high mortality was observed in obese patients (RR=1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.16, p=0.006, I2 = 97%). In multivariate meta-regression on severity, the covariate of the female gender, pulmonary disease, diabetes, older age, cardiovascular diseases, and hypertension was found to be significant and explained R2 = 40% of the between-study heterogeneity for severity. The aforementioned covariates were found to be significant for mortality as well, and these covariates collectively explained R2 = 50% of the between-study variability for mortality.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that obesity is significantly associated with increased severity and higher mortality among COVID-19 patients. Therefore, the inclusion of obesity or its surrogate body mass index in prognostic scores and improvement of guidelines for patient care management is recommended.

Breakthrough COVID-19 Infections in the US: Implications for Prolonging the Pandemic

The incidence of COVID-19 breakthrough infections-an infection that occurs after you have been vaccinated-has increased in frequency since the Delta and now Omicron variants of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus have become the dominant strains transmitted in the United States (US). Evidence suggests that individuals with breakthrough infections, though rare and expected, may readily transmit COVID-19 to unvaccinated populations, posing a continuing threat to the unvaccinated. Here, we examine factors contributing to breakthrough infections including a poor immune response to the vaccines due to the fact of advanced age and underlying comorbidities, the natural waning of immune protection from the vaccines over time, and viral variants that escape existing immune protection from the vaccines. The rise in breakthrough infections in the US and how they contribute to new infections, specifically among the unvaccinated and individuals with compromised immune systems, will create the need for additional booster vaccinations or development of modified vaccines that directly target current variants circulating among the general population. The need to expedite vaccination among the more than 49.8 million unvaccinated eligible people in the US is critical.

The clinical course, biochemical markers, and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 positive patients from the third wave in Pakistan: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Third wave of COVID-19 has affected several countries. Case fatality rates from first and second waves are expected to be surpassed by the current wave due to various variant transmissions. This study was aimed to compare and contrast the significant clinical markers between survivors and non-survivors during the third wave of COVID-19 to assess severity and prognosis.

Methods

It includes all the patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) during the third wave, and were monitored for their disease course and outcomes. A total of 209 patients were included in the analysis via non-probability consecutive sampling method.

Results

The median age was higher in non-surviving patients (p = 0.010). Majority of deaths occurred in intensive care patients (p < 0.001) and those with diabetes (p = 0.032) and hypertension (p = 0.003). Fever was the most predominant symptom in all patients (78.9%), dyspnea was common among expired individuals (p = 0.043) while recovered patients were more likely to be asymptomatic (p = 0.044). Gastrointestinal symptoms were not found marked during this wave. Being on ventilator has higher mortality (p < 0.001). Predominant radiological findings were interstitial patches or infiltrate (43.7%). Multivariable analysis showed hypertension (p = 0.042), BiPAP/CPAP (p < 0.001), being on ventilator (p = 0.004), and ARDS (p < 0.001) was associated with poor survival while patchy interstitial infiltrates on X-ray had good survival probability (p = 0.032). On Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, hypertension (p = 0.003), BiPAP/CPAP (p = 0.008), ventilator (p = 0.025), ICU stay (p = 0.001), high-grade fever (p = 0.001), and ARDS (p < 0.001) had reduced cumulative survival.

Conclusion

Certain biochemical markers were more predictive of disease severity in the third-wave than the preceding waves.

Characteristics of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in the Four Southern Regions Under the Proposed Southern Business Unit of Saudi Arabia

Background

This is the first descriptive and comparative study conducted of COVID-19 inpatients from multi-centers in the four administrative southern regions and proposed Southern Business Unit (Jazan, Najran, Bisha, and Aseer) of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).

Methods

Participants were 809 randomly selected patients admitted to the eight sampled hospitals with confirmed COVID-19 between March 2020 and February 2021. We assessed and compared socio-demographics, clinical characteristics, and clinical outcomes of the four regions.

Results

Socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of the participants are a mean age of 60 ± 17.7 years, 70% Saudi male, the prevalence of diabetes (DM2) 58%, hypertension (HTN) 48%, obesity 43%, cardiac diseases 15%, and immunity or cancer diseases almost 1%. The prevalence of complications during admission were bacterial pneumonia 65%, acquired respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) 32%, sepsis 20%, multi-organ failure 18%, acute kidney diseases 15%, and arrhythmia 4%. Clinical outcomes were: admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) 52%, mortality rate 25%, referred to other facilities 9%, and mean length of stay (LOS) was 11± 9.5 days. We observed statistically significant variation in many variables among the four regions. Najran and Aseer had a higher prevalence of risk factors for severity including age and comorbidities accompanied by higher rates of complications, ICU admissions, LOS, and mortality. Bisha and Jazan had lower prevalence of risk factors and LOS with lower rates of complications, ICU admissions, and mortality.

Conclusion

This study reveals that the geographic region in which the patient was cared for was related to the severity and outcome of COVID-19 infection. Policy makers should search for solutions to regional differences in underlying health conditions such as DM2, HTN, and obesity to plan for improvements in preventive care as well as resource distribution to ensure quality for all Saudi citizens. This study will serve as guidance to begin to form strategies for these improvements as envisioned in the future New Model of Care.

Hospital Length of Stay and Related Factors for COVID-19 Inpatients Among the Four Southern Regions Under the Proposed Southern Business Unit of Saudi Arabia

Objective

To assess the length of stay (LoS) variation for COVID-19 inpatients among the four regions of the Southern Business Unit (SBU).

Methods

This is a comparative retrospective study of the LoS of COVID-19 inpatients in the four regions of the SBU in the KSA. Data was collected from the Ministry of Health (MoH) in all hospitals in the SBU. Participants were all patients admitted with confirmed COVID-19 between March 2020 and February 2021. Variables included region (variable of interest), demographics, comorbidities, and complications. Multilinear regression was performed to control for any factors that might have had an association with LoS.

Results

The mean LoS of the total sample was 10 days and Bisha (the reference) was 7 days. Compared to Bisha, LoS in Jazan was 34% longer, in Najran 62% longer, and Aseer 40% longer. We observed that other factors also had an association with LoS, compared to Bisha, compared to the references, Saudi patients had a 15% shorter stay; admission to ICU increased LoS by 57%; patients who died during hospitalization had a 39% shorter LoS; the complications from COVID-19 of acute kidney injury and ARDS increased LoS by 22% and 48% respectively.

Conclusion

After statistically controlling for confounders, this study reveals that LoS was significantly impacted by region in the SBU in the KSA. We recommend that further study be conducted to illuminate the underlying causes of this variation which may be organizational or structural to ensure high quality of care, access to care, and equity of resources throughout all regions of the SBU in accordance with the new Model of Care in Vision 2030.

Prognosis of COVID-19 in respiratory allergy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Do underlying allergic respiratory diseases such as asthma and rhinitis predispose to a severe coronavirus (COVID-19) infection? We conducted this systematic review to map out and synthesize evidence of published literature.

Main body of the abstract

We searched five bibliographic databases for articles published between 1 January and 15 November 2020 using keywords: “COVID” AND “Allergic disease,” “Prognosis and COVID-19,” “SARS-CoV-2,” “Asthma,” “Allergic rhinitis.” We synthesized 32 eligible articles from a total of 11,376 articles retrieved from the search process. The profile of allergic respiratory conditions was identified, and only seven studies reported on the treatment administered. No significant difference was observed concerning the prevalence of COVID-19 in individuals with allergic asthma and those with non-allergic asthma (RR = 0.61, p = 0.08). The mortality rate significantly decreased in COVID-19-infected patients with asthma than patients without asthma (RR = 0.63, p = 0.04).

Short conclusion

There is little evidence available on the role of asthma medications and risk factors influencing the prognostic outcomes for COVID-19 individuals with respiratory allergies, which invites further research.

Obesity or increased body mass index and the risk of severe outcomes in patients with COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To assess the effect of obesity or a high body mass index (BMI) on the risk of severe outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

Studies on the relationship between BMI or obesity and COVID-19 since December 2019. The odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the effect size.

RESULTS

BMI was significantly increased in COVID-19 patients with severe illness (WMD: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.42-1.93), who were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) (WMD: 1.46; 95% CI: 0.96-1.97), who required invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) (WMD: 2.70, 95% CI: 1.05-4.35) and who died (WMD: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.02-1.80). In Western countries, obesity (BMI of ≥30 kg/m2) increased the risk of hospitalization (OR: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.22-3.54), admission to an ICU (OR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.29-1.84), need for IMV (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.38-2.17), and mortality (OR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.17-1.74) of patients with COVID-19. In the Asian population, obesity (BMI of ≥28 kg/m2) increased the risk of severe illness (OR: 3.14; 95% CI: 1.83-5.38). Compared with patients with COVID-19 and a BMI of <25 kg/m2, those with a BMI of 25-30 kg/m2 and ≥30 kg/m2 had a higher risk of need for IMV (OR: 2.19, 95% CI: 1.30-3.69 and OR: 3.04; 95% CI: 1.76-5.28, respectively). The risk of ICU admission in patients with COVID-19 and a BMI of ≥30 kg/m2 was significantly higher than in those with a BMI of 25-30 kg/m2 (OR: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.00-2.21).

CONCLUSION

As BMI increased, the risks of hospitalization, ICU admission, and need for IMV increased, especially in COVID-19 patients with obesity.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This systematic review and meta-analysis does not require an ethics approval as it does not collect any primary data from patients.

The isolated effect of age on the risk of COVID-19 severe outcomes: a systematic review with meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Increased age has been reported to be a factor for COVID-19 severe outcomes. However, many studies do not consider the age dependency of comorbidities, which influence the course of disease. Protection strategies often target individuals after a certain age, which may not necessarily be evidence based. The aim of this review was to quantify the isolated effect of age on hospitalisation, admission to intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation and death.

METHODS

This review was based on an umbrella review, in which Pubmed, Embase and preprint databases were searched on 10 December 2020, for relevant reviews on COVID-19 disease severity. Two independent reviewers evaluated the primary studies using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results were extracted, and each study was assessed for risk of bias. The isolated effect of age was estimated by meta-analysis, and the quality of evidence was assessed using Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.

RESULTS

Seventy studies met our inclusion criteria (case mortality: n=14, in-hospital mortality: n=44, hospitalisation: n=16, admission to ICU: n=12, mechanical ventilation: n=7). The risk of in-hospital and case mortality increased per age year by 5.7% and 7.4%, respectively (effect size (ES) in-hospital mortality=1.057, 95% CI 1.038 to 1.054; ES case mortality=1.074, 95% CI 1.061 to 1.087), while the risk of hospitalisation increased by 3.4% per age year (ES=1.034, 95% CI 1.021 to 1.048). No increased risk was observed for ICU admission and intubation by age year. There was no evidence of a specific age threshold at which the risk accelerates considerably. The confidence of evidence was high for mortality and hospitalisation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show a best-possible quantification of the increase in COVID-19 disease severity due to age. Rather than implementing age thresholds, prevention programmes should consider the continuous increase in risk. There is a need for continuous, high-quality research and 'living' reviews to evaluate the evidence throughout the pandemic, as results may change due to varying circumstances.

Impact of asthma on COVID-19 mortality in the United States: Evidence based on a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of asthma on the risk for mortality among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the United States by a quantitative meta-analysis.

METHODS

A random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). I² statistic, sensitivity analysis, Begg's test, meta-regression and subgroup analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

The data based on 56 studies with 426,261 COVID-19 patients showed that there was a statistically significant association between pre-existing asthma and the reduced risk for COVID-19 mortality in the United States (OR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.74-0.91). Subgroup analyses by age, male proportion, sample size, study design and setting demonstrated that pre-existing asthma was associated with a significantly reduced risk for COVID-19 mortality among studies with age ≥ 60 years old (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72-0.87), male proportion ≥ 55% (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72-0.87), male proportion ＜ 55% (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.69-0.95), sample sizes ≥ 700 cases (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.71-0.91), retrospective study/case series (OR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.75-0.89), prospective study (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.70-0.98) and hospitalized patients (OR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.74-0.91). Meta-regression did reveal none of factors mentioned above were possible reasons of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis indicated the robustness of our findings. No publication bias was detected in Begg's test (P = 0.4538).

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrated pre-existing asthma was significantly associated with a reduced risk for COVID-19 mortality in the United States.

Impact of Asthma on Severity and Outcomes in COVID-19

BACKGROUND

We conducted this systematic review to evaluate whether asthma increases the risk of severe disease and adverse outcomes among subjects with COVID-19.

METHODS

We queried the PubMed and Embase databases for studies indexed through December 2020. We included studies providing data on severe disease, hospitalization, ICU care, need for mechanical ventilation, or mortality among subjects with COVID-19 with and without asthma. We calculated the relative risk for each reported outcome of interest and used random effects modeling to summarize the data.

RESULTS

We retrieved 1,832 citations, and included 90 studies, in our review. Most publications reported data retrieved from electronic records of retrospective subject cohorts. Only 25 studies were judged to be of high quality. Subjects with asthma and COVID-19 had a marginally higher risk of hospitalization (summary relative risk 1.13, 95% CI 1.03-1.24) but not for severe disease (summary relative risk 1.17, 95% CI 0.62-2.20), ICU admission (summary relative risk 1.13, 95% CI 0.96-1.32), mechanical ventilation (summary relative risk 1.05, 95% CI 0.85-1.29), or mortality (summary relative risk 0.92, 95% CI 0.82-1.04) as compared to subjects with COVID-19 without asthma.

CONCLUSIONS

Comorbid asthma increases risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization but not severe disease or other adverse outcomes in subjects with COVID-19.

Diabetes, hypertension, body mass index, smoking and COVID-19-related mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of observational studies to investigate the association between diabetes, hypertension, body mass index (BMI) or smoking with the risk of death in patients with COVID-19 and to estimate the proportion of deaths attributable to these conditions.

METHODS

Relevant observational studies were identified by searches in the PubMed, Cochrane library and Embase databases through 14 November 2020. Random-effects models were used to estimate summary relative risks (SRRs) and 95% CIs. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Cochrane methods and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework.

RESULTS

A total of 186 studies representing 210 447 deaths among 1 304 587 patients with COVID-19 were included in this analysis. The SRR for death in patients with COVID-19 was 1.54 (95% CI 1.44 to 1.64, I2=92%, n=145, low certainty) for diabetes and 1.42 (95% CI 1.30 to 1.54, I2=90%, n=127, low certainty) for hypertension compared with patients without each of these comorbidities. Regarding obesity, the SSR was 1.45 (95% CI 1.31 to 1.61, I2=91%, n=54, high certainty) for patients with BMI ≥30 kg/m2 compared with those with BMI <30 kg/m2 and 1.12 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.17, I2=68%, n=25) per 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI. There was evidence of a J-shaped non-linear dose-response relationship between BMI and mortality from COVID-19, with the nadir of the curve at a BMI of around 22-24, and a 1.5-2-fold increase in COVID-19 mortality with extreme obesity (BMI of 40-45). The SRR was 1.28 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.40, I2=74%, n=28, low certainty) for ever, 1.29 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.62, I2=84%, n=19) for current and 1.25 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.42, I2=75%, n=14) for former smokers compared with never smokers. The absolute risk of COVID-19 death was increased by 14%, 11%, 12% and 7% for diabetes, hypertension, obesity and smoking, respectively. The proportion of deaths attributable to diabetes, hypertension, obesity and smoking was 8%, 7%, 11% and 2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that diabetes, hypertension, obesity and smoking were associated with higher COVID-19 mortality, contributing to nearly 30% of COVID-19 deaths.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020218115.

Association of race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status with COVID-19 30-day mortality at a Philadelphia medical center using a retrospective cohort study

COVID-19 has disproportionately affected low-income communities and people of color. Previous studies demonstrated that race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES) are not independently correlated with COVID-19 mortality. The purpose of our study is to determine the effect of race/ethnicity and SES on COVID-19 30-day mortality in a diverse, Philadelphian population. This is a retrospective cohort study in a single-center tertiary care hospital in Philadelphia, PA. The study includes adult patients hospitalized with polymerase-chain-reaction-confirmed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020 and June 6, 2020. The primary outcome was a composite of COVID-19 death or hospice discharge within 30 days of discharge. The secondary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The study included 426 patients: 16.7% died, 3.3% were discharged to hospice, and 20.0% were admitted to the ICU. Using multivariable analysis, race/ethnicity was not associated with the primary nor secondary outcome. In Model 4, age greater than 75 (odds ratio [OR]: 11.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.96-61.97) and renal disease (OR: 2.78; 95% CI: 1.31-5.90) were associated with higher odds of the composite primary outcome. Living in a "very-low-income area" (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.12-0.71) and body mass index (BMI) 30-35 (OR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.69) were associated with lower odds of the primary outcome. When controlling for demographics, SES, and comorbidities, race/ethnicity was not independently associated with the composite primary outcome. Very-low SES, as extrapolated from census-tract-level income data, was associated with lower odds of the composite primary outcome.

Pre-existing health conditions and severe COVID-19 outcomes: an umbrella review approach and meta-analysis of global evidence

BACKGROUND

This study applies an umbrella review approach to summarise the global evidence on the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes in patients with pre-existing health conditions.

METHODS

Systematic reviews (SRs) were identified in PubMed, Embase/Medline and seven pre-print servers until December 11, 2020. Due to the absence of age-adjusted risk effects stratified by geographical regions, a re-analysis of the evidence was conducted. Primary studies were extracted from SRs and evaluated for inclusion in the re-analysis. Studies were included if they reported risk estimates (odds ratio (OR), hazard ratio (HR), relative risk (RR)) for hospitalisation, intensive care unit admission, intubation or death. Estimated associations were extracted from the primary studies for reported pre-existing conditions. Meta-analyses were performed stratified for each outcome by regions of the World Health Organization. The evidence certainty was assessed using GRADE. Registration number CRD42020215846.

RESULTS

In total, 160 primary studies from 120 SRs contributed 464 estimates for 42 pre-existing conditions. Most studies were conducted in North America, European, and Western Pacific regions. Evidence from Africa, South/Latin America, and the Eastern Mediterranean region was scarce. No evidence was available from the South-East Asia region. Diabetes (HR range 1.2-2.0 (CI range 1.1-2.8)), obesity (OR range 1.5-1.75 (CI range 1.1-2.3)), heart failure (HR range 1.3-3.3 (CI range 0.9-8.2)), COPD (HR range 1.12-2.2 (CI range 1.1-3.2)) and dementia (HR range 1.4-7.7 (CI range 1.2-39.6)) were associated with fatal COVID-19 in different regions, although the estimates varied. Evidence from Europe and North America showed that liver cirrhosis (OR range 3.2-5.9 (CI range 0.9-27.7)) and active cancer (OR range 1.6-4.7 (CI range 0.5-14.9)) were also associated with increased risk of death. Association between HIV and undesirable COVID-19 outcomes showed regional heterogeneity, with an increased risk of death in Africa (HR 1.7 (CI 1.3-2.2)). GRADE certainty was moderate to high for most associations.

CONCLUSION

Risk of undesirable COVID-19 health outcomes is consistently increased in certain patient subgroups across geographical regions, showing high variability in others. The results can be used to inform COVID-19 vaccine prioritisation or other intervention strategies.

Asthma and Coronavirus Disease 2019 Risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Individual case series and cohort studies have reported conflicting results in people with asthma on the vulnerability to and risk of mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Research question

Are people with asthma at a higher risk of being infected or hospitalised or poorer clinical outcomes from COVID-19?

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis based on five main databases including the World Health Organization COVID-19 database between 1 December 2019 and 11 July 2021 on studies with a control (non-asthma) group was conducted. Prevalence and risk ratios were pooled using Sidik–Jonkman random-effects meta-analyses.

Findings

51 studies with an 8.08% (95% CI 6.87–9.30%) pooled prevalence of people with asthma among COVID-19 positive cases. The risk ratios were 0.83 (95% CI 0.73–0.95, p=0.01) for acquiring COVID-19; 1.18 (95% CI 0.98–1.42, p=0.08) for hospitalisation; 1.21 (95% CI 0.97–1.51, p=0.09) for intensive care unit (ICU) admission; 1.06 (95% CI 0.82–1.36, p=0.65) for ventilator use; and 0.94 (95% CI 0.76–1.17, p=0.58) for mortality for people with asthma. Subgroup analyses by continent revealed a significant difference in risk of acquiring COVID-19, ICU admission, ventilator use and death between the continents.

Interpretation

The risk of being infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was reduced compared to the non-asthma group. No statistically significant differences in hospitalisation, ICU admission and ventilator use were found between groups. Subgroup analyses showed significant differences in outcomes from COVID-19 between America, Europe and Asia. Additional studies are required to confirm this risk profile, particularly in Africa and South America, where few studies originate.

The risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 was reduced in patients with asthma compared to the non-asthma group. No significant differences in hospitalisation, ICU admission, ventilator use and mortality were found between groups.https://bit.ly/3izKB9h

2020 Year in Review: Mechanical Ventilation During the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) represents the greatest medical crisis encountered in the young history of critical care and respiratory care. During the early months of the pandemic, when little was known about the virus, the acute hypoxemic respiratory failure it caused did not appear to fit conveniently or consistently into our classification of ARDS. This not only re-ignited a half-century's long simmering debate over taxonomy, but also fueled similar debates over how PEEP and lung-protective ventilation should be titrated, as well as the appropriate role of noninvasive ventilation in ARDS. COVID-19 ignited other debates on emerging concepts such as ARDS phenotypes and patient self-inflicted lung injury from vigorous spontaneous breathing. Over a year later, these early perplexities have receded into the background without having been reviewed or resolved. With a full year of evidence having been published, this narrative review systematically analyzes whether COVID-19-associated respiratory failure is essentially ARDS, with perhaps a somewhat different course of presentation. This includes a review of the severity of hypoxemia and derangements in pulmonary mechanics, PEEP requirements, recruitment potential, ability to achieve lung-protective ventilation goals, duration of mechanical ventilation, associated mortality, and response to noninvasive ventilation. This paper also reviews the concepts of ARDS phenotypes and patient self-inflicted lung injury as these are crucial to understanding the contentious debate over the nature and management of COVID-19.

Outcomes among patients with COVID-19 and asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: It remains unclear if asthma is a risk factor associated with worse outcomes among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: We performed a comprehensive database search for studies published from January 1, 2019, to October 2, 2020. We included studies that evaluated outcomes among patients with COVID-19 and underlying asthma. Outcomes of interest included the need for hospitalization, length of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and death. The meta-analysis was conducted by using random-effects methodology. Results: A total of 389 studies were identified through data base searches. After abstract and full-text screening, 16 observational studies with 92,275 patients were included in the analysis. Of the 16 studies, 15 were retrospective and 1 was a prospective cohort study. The average age was 39.6 years, with 48% female patients. Six of the studies included pediatric patients, and one of these studies only evaluated pediatric patients. One study only evaluated pregnant patients. Among patients with COVID-19, the presence of asthma was not associated with any significant increase in risk of hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] 1.46 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.29-7.28]), length of hospitalization (1.59 days [-0.55 to 3.74]), ICU admission (OR 1.65 [95% CI, 0.56-4.17]), or death (OR 0.73 [95% CI, 0.38-1.40]). The overall risk of bias of the included studies was high. Conclusion: Among the patients with COVID-19, asthma did not seem to significantly increase the risk of hospitalization, length of hospitalization, ICU admission, or death.

Effect of comorbid pulmonary disease on the severity of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was first detected in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 and continues to spread worldwide. Persistent questions remain about the relationship between the severity of COVID-19 and comorbid diseases, as well as other chronic pulmonary conditions. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to examine in detail whether the underlying chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (COPD), asthma and chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) were associated with an increased risk of more severe COVID-19. A comprehensive literature search was performed using five international search engines. In the initial search, 722 articles were identified. After eliminating duplicate records and further consideration of eligibility criteria, 53 studies with 658,073 patients were included in the final analysis. COPD was present in 5.2% (2191/42,373) of patients with severe COVID-19 and in 1.4% (4203/306,151) of patients with non-severe COVID-19 (random-effects model; OR = 2.58, 95% CI = 1.99-3.34, Z = 7.15, p < 0.001). CRD was present in 8.6% (3780/44,041) of patients with severe COVID-19 and in 5.7% (16,057/280,447) of patients with non-severe COVID-19 (random-effects model; OR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.74-2.64, Z = 7.1, p < 0.001). Asthma was present in 2.3% (1873/81,319) of patients with severe COVID-19 and in 2.2% (11,796/538,737) of patients with non-severe COVID-19 (random-effects model; OR = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.79-1.60, Z = 0.66, p = 0.50). In conclusion, comorbid COPD and CRD were clearly associated with a higher severity of COVID-19; however, no association between asthma and severe COVID-19 was identified.

Asthma in Adult Patients with COVID-19. Prevalence and Risk of Severe Disease

Rationale: Health outcomes of people with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) range from no symptoms to severe illness and death. Asthma, a common chronic lung disease, has been considered likely to increase the severity of COVID-19, although data addressing this hypothesis have been scarce until very recently.Objectives: To review the epidemiologic literature related to asthma's potential role in COVID-19 severity.Methods: Studies were identified through the PubMed (MEDLINE) and medRxiv (preprint) databases using the search terms "asthma," "SARS-CoV-2" (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), and "COVID-19," and by cross-referencing citations in identified studies that were available in print or online before December 22, 2020.Measurements and Main Results: Asthma prevalence data were obtained from studies of people with COVID-19 and regional health statistics. We identified 150 studies worldwide that allowed us to compare the prevalence of asthma in patients with COVID-19 by region, disease severity, and mortality. The results of our analyses do not provide clear evidence of increased risk of COVID-19 diagnosis, hospitalization, severity, or mortality due to asthma.Conclusions: These findings could provide some reassurance to people with asthma regarding its potential to increase their risk of severe morbidity from COVID-19.

Zoonotic coronavirus epidemics: Severe acute respiratory syndrome, Middle East respiratory syndrome, and coronavirus disease 2019

OBJECTIVE

To review the virology, immunology, epidemiology, clinical manifestations, and treatment of the following 3 major zoonotic coronavirus epidemics: severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

DATA SOURCES

Published literature obtained through PubMed database searches and reports from national and international public health agencies.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Studies relevant to the basic science, epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and treatment of SARS, MERS, and COVID-19, with a focus on patients with asthma, allergy, and primary immunodeficiency.

RESULTS

Although SARS and MERS each caused less than a thousand deaths, COVID-19 has caused a worldwide pandemic with nearly 1 million deaths. Diagnosing COVID-19 relies on nucleic acid amplification tests, and infection has broad clinical manifestations that can affect almost every organ system. Asthma and atopy do not seem to predispose patients to COVID-19 infection, but their effects on COVID-19 clinical outcomes remain mixed and inconclusive. It is recommended that effective therapies, including inhaled corticosteroids and biologic therapy, be continued to maintain disease control. There are no reports of COVID-19 among patients with primary innate and T-cell deficiencies. The presentation of COVID-19 among patients with primary antibody deficiencies is variable, with some experiencing mild clinical courses, whereas others experiencing a fatal disease. The landscape of treatment for COVID-19 is rapidly evolving, with both antivirals and immunomodulators demonstrating efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Further data are needed to better understand the role of asthma, allergy, and primary immunodeficiency on COVID-19 infection and outcomes.

Comparative assessment of mortality risk factors between admission and follow-up models among patients hospitalized with COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare differences in mortality risk factors between admission and follow-up incorporated models.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of 524 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection admitted to a tertiary medical center in São Paulo, Brazil from 13 March to 30 April 2020. Data were collected on admission, and the third, eighth and fourteenth days of hospitalization. The hazard ratio (HR) was calculated and 28-day in-hospital mortality risk factors were compared between admission and follow-up models using a time-dependent Cox regression model.

RESULTS

Of 524 patients, 50.4% needed mechanical ventilation. The 28-day mortality rate was 32.8%. Compared with follow-up, admission models under-estimated the mortality HR for peripheral oxygen saturation <92% (1.21 versus 2.09), heart rate >100 bpm (1.19 versus 2.04), respiratory rate >24/min (1.01 versus 1.82) and mechanical ventilation (1.92 versus 12.93). Low oxygen saturation, higher oxygen support and more biomarkers-including lactate dehydrogenase, C-reactive protein, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, and urea remained associated with mortality after adjustment for clinical factors at follow-up compared with only urea and oxygen support at admission.

CONCLUSIONS

The inclusion of follow-up measurements changed mortality hazards of clinical signs and biomarkers. Low oxygen saturation, higher oxygen support, lactate dehydrogenase, C-reactive protein, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, and urea could help with prognosis of patients during follow-up.

Evaluation of the Current Therapeutic Approaches for COVID-19: A Systematic Review and a Meta-analysis

Background: Limited data on the efficacy and safety of currently applied COVID-19 therapeutics and their impact on COVID-19 outcomes have raised additional concern. Objective and Methods: To estimate the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 therapeutics, we performed meta-analyses of the studies reporting clinical features and treatments of COVID-19 published from January 21 to September 6, 2020. Results: We included 136 studies that involved 102,345 COVID-19 patients. The most prevalent treatments were antibiotics (proportion: 0.59, 95% CI: [0.51, 0.67]) and antivirals (proportion: 0.52, 95% CI: [0.44, 0.60]). The combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and Arbidol was the most effective in treating COVID-19 (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.68, 95% CI: [0.15, 1.21]). The use of corticosteroids was associated with a small clinical improvement (SMD = -0.40, 95% CI: [-0.85, -0.23]), but with a higher risk of disease progression and death (mortality: RR = 9.26, 95% CI: [4.81, 17.80]; hospitalization length: RR = 1.54, 95% CI: [1.39, 1.72]; severe adverse events: RR = 2.65, 95% CI: [2.09, 3.37]). The use of hydroxychloroquine was associated with a higher risk of death (RR = 1.68, 95% CI: [1.18, 2.38]). The combination of lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin, and interferon-β (RR = 0.34, 95% CI: [0.22, 0.54]); hydroxychloroquine (RR = 0.58, 95% CI: [0.39, 0.58]); and lopinavir/ritonavir (RR = 0.72, 95% CI: [0.56, 0.91]) was associated with reduced hospitalization length. Hydrocortisone (RR = 0.05, 95% CI: [0.03, 0.10]) and remdesivir (RR = 0.74, 95% CI: [0.62, 0.90]) were associated with lower incidence of severe adverse events. Dexamethasone was not significant in reducing disease progression (RR = 0.45, 95% CI: [0.16, 1.25]) and mortality (RR = 0.90, 95% CI: [0.70, 1.16]). The estimated combination of corticosteroids with antivirals was associated with a better clinical improvement than antivirals alone (SMD = -1.09, 95% CI: [-1.64, -0.53]). Conclusion: Antivirals are safe and effective in COVID-19 treatment. Remdesivir cannot significantly reduce COVID-19 mortality and hospitalization length, while it is associated with a lower incidence of severe adverse events. Corticosteroids could increase COVID-19 severity, but it could be beneficial when combined with antivirals. Our data are potentially valuable for the clinical treatment and management of COVID-19 patients.

Perspectives on glucocorticoid treatment for COVID-19: a systematic review

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a viral pneumonia that can lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Until the commercialization of a vaccine, pharmacological treatment still represents an important strategy to fight against the ongoing pandemic. Glucocorticoids (GC) were widely used in the past coronavirus pandemics and have been used against the coronavirus 2 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2). This article aimed to review the studies that described the treatment with GC in COVID-19 patients. Randomized or nonrandomized clinical trials and retrospective or prospective-controlled longitudinal studies were screened for this systematic review. Studies in English, Portuguese, and Spanish published since 2019, with participants of any clinical status, geographic location, age, and sex were included. The most significant interest was related to the length of stay, radiological profile changes, viremia, and mortality. The research was done electronically on the Pubmed database using the following terms: "corticosteroids", "glucocorticoids", "dexamethasone", "methylprednisolone", "COVID-19", "SARS- CoV-2", "ADRS". We identified 6332 publications, and at the end, 14 retrospective observational studies that met all the inclusion criteria were selected. These studies included only patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 confirmed by RT-PCR, involving 2,713 participants. The results showed great heterogeneity in their designs and results, which precludes a reliable conclusion on the use of GCs in the treatment of COVID-19.

COPD and the risk of poor outcomes in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are highly susceptible from respiratory exacerbations from viral respiratory tract infections. However, it is unclear whether they are at increased risk of COVID-19 pneumonia or COVID-19-related mortality. We aimed to determine whether COPD is a risk factor for adverse COVID-19 outcomes including hospitalization, severe COVID-19, or death.

METHODS

Following the PRISMA guidelines, we performed a systematic review of COVID-19 clinical studies published between November 1^st, 2019 and January 28^th, 2021 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42020191491). We included studies that quantified the number of COPD patients, and reported at least one of the following outcomes stratified by COPD status: hospitalization; severe COVID-19; ICU admission; mechanical ventilation; acute respiratory distress syndrome; or mortality. We meta-analyzed the results of individual studies to determine the odds ratio (OR) of these outcomes in patients with COPD compared to those without COPD.

FINDINGS

Fifty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria, and underwent data extraction. Most studies were retrospective cohort studies/case series of hospitalized patients. Only four studies examined the effects of COPD on COVID-19 outcomes as their primary endpoint. In aggregate, COPD was associated with increased odds of hospitalization (OR 4.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.65-4.90), ICU admission (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.02-1.78), and mortality (OR 2.47, 95% CI 2.18-2.79).

INTERPRETATION

Having a clinical diagnosis of COPD significantly increases the odds of poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. COPD patients should thus be considered a high-risk group, and targeted for preventative measures and aggressive treatment for COVID-19 including vaccination.

Comorbidities in SARS-CoV-2 Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has rapidly spread across the globe at unprecedented speed and is showing no signs of slowing down. The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to significant health burden in infected patients especially in those with underlying comorbidities. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between comorbidities and their role in the exacerbation of disease in COVID-19 patients leading to fatal outcomes. A systematic review was conducted using data from MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases published from 1 December 2019 to 15 September 2020. Fifty-three articles were included in the systematic review. Of those 53 articles, 8 articles were eligible for meta-analysis. Hypertension, obesity, and diabetes mellitus were identified to be the most prevalent comorbidities in COVID-19 patients. Our meta-analysis showed that cancer, chronic kidney diseases, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension were independently associated with mortality in COVID-19 patients. Chronic kidney disease was statistically the most prominent comorbidity leading to death. However, despite having high prevalence, obesity was not associated with mortality in COVID-19 patients.IMPORTANCE COVID-19 has plagued the world since it was first identified in December 2019. Previous systematic reviews and meta-analysis were limited by various factors such as the usage of non-peer reviewed data and were also limited by the lack of clinical data on a global scale. Comorbidities are frequently cited as risk factors for severe COVID-19 outcomes. However, the degree to which specific comorbidities impact the disease is debatable. Our study selection involves a global reach and covers all comorbidities that were reported to be involved in the exacerbation of COVID-19 leading to fatal outcomes, which allows us to identify the specific comorbidities that have higher risk in patients. The study highlights COVID-19 high-risk groups. However, further research should focus on the status of comorbidities and prognosis in COVID-19 patients.

Thromboinflammatory Biomarkers in COVID-19: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 17,052 Patients

Objective

To evaluate differences in thromboinflammatory biomarkers between patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection/death and mild infection.

Patients and Methods

MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, EBSCO, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were searched for studies comparing thromboinflammatory biomarkers in COVID-19 among patients with severe COVID-19 disease or death (severe/nonsurvivors) and those with nonsevere disease or survivors (nonsevere/survivors) from January 1, 2020, through July 11, 2020. Inclusion criteria were (1) hospitalized patients 18 years or older comparing severe/nonsurvivors vs nonsevere/survivors and (2) biomarkers of inflammation and/or thrombosis. A random-effects model was used to estimate the weighted mean difference (WMD) between the 2 groups of COVID-19 severity.

Results

We included 75 studies with 17,052 patients. The severe/nonsurvivor group was older, had a greater proportion of men, and had a higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, cardiac or cerebrovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, malignancy, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thromboinflammatory biomarkers were significantly higher in patients with severe disease, including D-dimer (WMD, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.71; I²=83.85%), fibrinogen (WMD, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.67; I²=61.88%; P<.001), C-reactive protein (CRP) (WMD, 35.74; 95% CI, 30.16 to 41.31; I²=85.27%), high-sensitivity CRP (WMD, 62.68; 95% CI, 45.27 to 80.09; I²=0%), interleukin 6 (WMD, 22.81; 95% CI, 17.90 to 27.72; I²=90.42%), and ferritin (WMD, 506.15; 95% CI, 356.24 to 656.06; I²=52.02%). Moderate to significant heterogeneity was observed for all parameters (I² > 25%). Subanalysis based on disease severity, mortality, and geographic region of the studies revealed similar inferences.

Conclusion

Thromboinflammatory biomarkers (D-dimer, fibrinogen, CRP, high-sensitivity CRP, ferritin, and interleukin 6) and marker of end-organ damage (high-sensitivity troponin I) are associated with increased severity and mortality in COVID-19 infection.

Clinical Characteristics and Predictors of Mortality in Minority Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19 Infection

Objectives

To identify the early mortality predictors in minority patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Design

Demographics, presenting characteristics, admission laboratory data, ICU admission, and mortality data were collected from 200 consecutively hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Results

The mean (SD) age was 58.9 (15.1) years, 121(60.5%) were men, 143 (71.5%) were African Americans, and 33 (16.5%) were Latino. Common presenting symptoms were cough 130 (65.0%), shortness of breath 129 (64.5%), and fever 121 (60.5%). One or more comorbid illness occurred in 171 (85.5%) and common comorbidities were hypertension (130 (65.2%)), diabetes (100 (50.0%)) and chronic kidney disease (60 (30.0%)). Of the 200 patients, 71 (35.5%) were treated in the ICU, 47 (24.2%) received mechanical ventilation, 45 (22.5%) died, and 155(77.5%) patients discharged home alive. The non-survivors were significantly older and had elevated markers of inflammation, coagulation, and acute organ damage on presentation. Age ≥ 65 years (odds ratio (OR), 3.78; 95% CI, 1.74–8.22; P = .001), lactate dehydrogenase level > 400 IU/L (OR, 9.1; 95% CI, 2.97–28.1; p < 0.001), C-reactive protein > 20 mg/dl (OR, 5.56; 95%CI, 1.84–16.8; p < 0.001), ferritin > 2000 ng/ml (OR, 5.42; 95%CI, 1.63–17.9; p = 0.006), creatinine kinase > 1000 iu/l (OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.23 10.3; p = 0.019), procalcitonin > 2.5 ng/ml (OR, 4.21; 95% CI, 1.47–12.0; p = 0.007), D-dimer level > 3.0 μg/ml (OR,10.9; 95% CI, 3.33–36.2; p = < 0.001), creatinine > 2 mg/dl (OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 1.29–15.8; P = 0.018) at admission were associated independently with increases risk of in-hospital mortality.

Conclusion

Patients of advanced age that present with elevated biomarkers of inflammation, coagulation, and end-organ damage were at higher risk of mortality.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40615-020-00961-x.

Early changes in laboratory parameters are predictors of mortality and ICU admission in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite the growing knowledge of the clinicopathological features of COVID-19, the correlation between early changes in the laboratory parameters and the clinical outcomes of patients is not entirely understood. In this study, we aimed to assess the prognostic value of early laboratory parameters in COVID-19. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis based on the available literature in five databases. The last search was on July 26, 2020, with key terms related to COVID-19. Eligible studies contained original data of at least ten infected patients and reported on baseline laboratory parameters of patients. We calculated weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals. 93 and 78 studies were included in quantitative and qualitative syntheses, respectively. Higher baseline total white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), lactate-dehydrogenase (LDH), creatine kinase (CK), D-dimer and lower absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) (WMDALC = - 0.35 × 109/L [CI - 0.43, - 0.27], p < 0.001, I2 = 94.2%; < 0.8 × 109/L, ORALC = 3.74 [CI 1.77, 7.92], p = 0.001, I2 = 65.5%) were all associated with higher mortality rate. On admission WBC, ALC, D-dimer, CRP, LDH, and CK changes could serve as alarming prognostic factors. The correct interpretation of laboratory abnormalities can guide therapeutic decisions, especially in early identification of potentially critical cases. This meta-analysis should help to allocate resources and save lives by enabling timely intervention.

Case Fatality Rates for Patients with COVID-19 Requiring Invasive Mechanical Ventilation. A Meta-analysis

Rationale: Initial reports of case fatality rates (CFRs) among adults with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) are highly variable.Objectives: To examine the CFR of patients with COVID-19 receiving IMV.Methods: Two authors independently searched PubMed, Embase, medRxiv, bioRxiv, the COVID-19 living systematic review, and national registry databases. The primary outcome was the "reported CFR" for patients with confirmed COVID-19 requiring IMV. "Definitive hospital CFR" for patients with outcomes at hospital discharge was also investigated. Finally, CFR was analyzed by patient age, geographic region, and study quality on the basis of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.Measurements and Results: Sixty-nine studies were included, describing 57,420 adult patients with COVID-19 who received IMV. Overall reported CFR was estimated as 45% (95% confidence interval [CI], 39-52%). Fifty-four of 69 studies stated whether hospital outcomes were available but provided a definitive hospital outcome on only 13,120 (22.8%) of the total IMV patient population. Among studies in which age-stratified CFR was available, pooled CFR estimates ranged from 47.9% (95% CI, 46.4-49.4%) in younger patients (age ≤40 yr) to 84.4% (95% CI, 83.3-85.4%) in older patients (age >80 yr). CFR was also higher in early COVID-19 epicenters. Overall heterogeneity is high (I² >90%), with nonsignificant Egger's regression test suggesting no publication bias.Conclusions: Almost half of patients with COVID-19 receiving IMV died based on the reported CFR, but variable CFR reporting methods resulted in a wide range of CFRs between studies. The reported CFR was higher in older patients and in early pandemic epicenters, which may be influenced by limited ICU resources. Reporting of definitive outcomes on all patients would facilitate comparisons between studies.Systematic review registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020186997).

Characteristics of mortal COVID-19 cases compared to the survivors

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) initially occurred in December 2019 and triggered a public health emergency. The increasing number of deaths due to this disease was of great concern. Therefore, our study aimed to explore risk factors associated with COVID-19 deaths.

After having searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and CNKI for studies published as of August 10, 2020, we selected articles and extracted data. The meta-analysis was performed using Stata 16.0 software.

Nineteen studies were used in our meta-analysis. The proportions of comorbidities such as diabetes, hypertension, malignancies, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardio-cerebrovascular disease, and chronic liver disease were statistically significantly higher in mortal COVID-19 cases. Coagulation and inflammatory markers, such as platelet count, D-dimer, prothrombin time, C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, and interleukin 6, predicted the deterioration of the disease. In addition, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and mechanical ventilation predicted the poor prognosis during its progression.

The COVID-19 pandemic is still evolving, placing a huge burden on healthcare facilities. Certain coagulation indicators, inflammatory indicators, and comorbidities contribute to the prognosis of patients. Our study results may help clinicians optimize the treatment and ultimately reduce the mortality rate.

Predictors of in-hospital COVID-19 mortality: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis exploring differences by age, sex and health conditions

OBJECTIVE

Risk factors for in-hospital mortality in confirmed COVID-19 patients have been summarized in numerous meta-analyses, but it is still unclear whether they vary according to the age, sex and health conditions of the studied populations. This study explored these variables as potential mortality predictors.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted by searching the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases of studies available through July 27, 2020. The pooled risk was estimated with the odds ratio (p-OR) or effect size (p-ES) obtained through random-effects meta-analyses. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were applied to explore differences by age, sex and health conditions. The MOOSE guidelines were strictly followed.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 60 studies, with a total of 51,225 patients (12,458 [24.3%] deaths) from hospitals in 13 countries. A higher in-hospital mortality risk was found for dyspnoea (p-OR = 2.5), smoking (p-OR = 1.6) and several comorbidities (p-OR range: 1.8 to 4.7) and laboratory parameters (p-ES range: 0.3 to -2.6). Age was the main source of heterogeneity, followed by sex and health condition. The following predictors were more markedly associated with mortality in studies with patients with a mean age ≤60 years: dyspnoea (p-OR = 4.3), smoking (p-OR = 2.8), kidney disease (p-OR = 3.8), hypertension (p-OR = 3.7), malignancy (p-OR = 3.7), diabetes (p-OR = 3.2), pulmonary disease (p-OR = 3.1), decreased platelet count (p-ES = -1.7), decreased haemoglobin concentration (p-ES = -0.6), increased creatinine (p-ES = 2.4), increased interleukin-6 (p-ES = 2.4) and increased cardiac troponin I (p-ES = 0.7). On the other hand, in addition to comorbidities, the most important mortality predictors in studies with older patients were albumin (p-ES = -3.1), total bilirubin (p-ES = 0.7), AST (p-ES = 1.8), ALT (p-ES = 0.4), urea nitrogen (p-ES), C-reactive protein (p-ES = 2.7), LDH (p-ES = 2.4) and ferritin (p-ES = 1.7). Obesity was associated with increased mortality only in studies with fewer chronic or critical patients (p-OR = 1.8).

CONCLUSION

The prognostic effect of clinical conditions on COVID-19 mortality vary substantially according to the mean age of patients.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020176595.

Framework to aid analysis and interpretation of ongoing COVID-19 research

The global coronavirus pandemic has precipitated a rapid unprecedented research response, including investigations into risk factors for COVID-19 infection, severity, or death. However, results from this research have produced heterogeneous findings, including articles published in Wellcome Open Research. Here, we use ethnicity, obesity, and smoking as illustrative examples to demonstrate how a research question can produce very different answers depending on how it is framed. For example, these factors can be both strongly associated or have a null association with death due to COVID-19, even when using the same dataset and statistical modelling. Highlighting the reasons underpinning this apparent paradox provides an important framework for reporting and interpreting ongoing COVID-19 research.