Rate of venous thromboembolism in a prospective all-comers cohort with COVID-19

Hemoadsorption in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has been widely used for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in recent years. However, the role of hemoadsorption in ARDS patients requiring VV ECMO is unclear.

METHODS

Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to describe the effect of hemoadsorption on outcomes of ARDS patients requiring VV ECMO and elucidate the risk factors for adverse outcomes. We conducted and reported a systematic literature review based on the principles derived from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The systematic review searched Embase, CINHAL, and Pubmed databases for studies on ARDS patients receiving hemoadsorption and VV ECMO. The demographic data, clinical data and biological data of the patients were collected.

RESULTS

We ultimately included a total of 8 articles including 189 patients. We characterized the population both clinically and biologically. Our review showed most studies described reductions in inflammatory markers and fluid resuscitation drug dosage in ARDS patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) or sepsis after hemoadsorption.

CONCLUSION

Because most of the studies have the characteristics of high heterogeneity, we could only draw very cautious conclusions that hemoadsorption therapy may enhance hemodynamic stability in ARDS patients with COVID-19 or sepsis receiving VV ECMO support. However, our results do not allow us to draw conclusions that hemoadsorption could reduce inflammation and mortality. Prospective randomized controlled studies with a larger sample size are needed in the future to verify the role of hemoadsorption in ARDS patients requiring VV ECMO.

Prevalence of Thromboembolic Events, Including Venous Thromboembolism and Arterial Thrombosis, in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Background

Many studies have evaluated thromboembolic events in COVID-19 patients, and most of them have reported a high estimation of the prevalence of such events. The present study sought to evaluate the prevalence of thromboembolic events in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

This study is a systematic review with meta-analysis that investigated thromboembolic events in patients with COVID-19 from the start of the pandemic to August 31, 2021. The 4 main databases for collecting articles were Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. Deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, arterial thrombosis, and the overall rate of thromboembolic events were considered primary outcomes.

Results

In a total of 63 studies (104 920 patients with COVID-19), the overall thrombosis rate was 21% (95% CI, 18% to 25%), the rate of deep vein thrombosis was 20% (95% Cl, 16% to 25%), the rate of pulmonary embolism was 8% (95% Cl, 6% to 10%), and the rate of arterial thrombosis was 5% (95% Cl, 3% to 7%). The prevalence of all primary outcomes in critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) was significantly higher (P<0.05). In older patients, the prevalence of overall thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or deep vein thrombosis was significantly higher (P<0.05).

Conclusion

This study showed that COVID-19 increases the risk of thromboembolic events, especially in elderly and critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. Therefore, more strategies are needed to prevent thromboembolic events in patients with COVID-19, especially in ICU-admitted and elderly patients.

Coagulopathy and thromboembolic events a pathogenic mechanism of COVID-19 associated with mortality: An updated review

During 2019, the SARS-CoV-2 emerged from China, and during months, COVID-19 spread in many countries around the world. The expanding data about pathogenesis of this virus could elucidate the exact mechanism by which COVID-19 caused death in humans. One of the pathogenic mechanisms of this disease is coagulation. Coagulation disorders that affect both venous and arterial systems occur in patients with COVID-19. The possible mechanism involved in the coagulation could be excessive inflammation induced by SARS-CoV-2. However, it is not yet clear well how SARS-CoV-2 promotes coagulopathy. However, some factors, such as pulmonary endothelial cell damage and some anticoagulant system disorders, are assumed to have an important role. In this study, we assessed conducted studies about COVID-19-induced coagulopathy to obtain clearer vision of the wide range of manifestations and possible pathogenesis mechanisms.

PECULIARITIES OF THE COURSE OF PULMONARY EMBOLISM DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

OBJECTIVE

The aim: A comparative analysis of the course of pulmonary embolism during the COVID-19 pandemic and the era before pandemia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and methods: 294 patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) , 1 group - 188 with PE before the pandemic, 2 group -106 during the pandemic. Two subgroups were distinguished in 2 group : 1- with laboratory-excluded coronavirus (acute and in anamnesis) and 2 - with a history of COVID-19. The diagnosis of PE was confirmed by CT. Echocardiography and ultrasound Doppler imaging of the veins of the lower extremities were performed.

RESULTS

Results: In 1 group there was a more significant increase in pulmonary artery pressure (44.29 ± 17.04 vs 36.91 ± 16.6, p 0.0023) and a decrease in the E/A ratio of the right ventricle (0.80 ± 0,21 vs 1.28 ± 1.42, p 0.0202). In 2 subgroup of patients with COVID-19 had a significantly higher incidence of Diabetes mellitus (73.7% vs 13.3%, p 0.00001) and significantly lower signs of superficial venous thrombosis of the lower extremities (5.3% vs 33,3%, p 0,0175) and signs of proximal deep vein thrombosis (0% vs 56.7%, p 0.00001) and 3 times less often there was a high risk of adverse disease, right ventricular dysfunction were more pronounced (ratio E/A 0.87 ± 0.25 vs 1.13 ± 0.28, p 0.022).

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: In patients with coronavirus infection, PE was significantly more common in the presence of diabetes mellitus , right ventricular diastole disorders were more common, and superficial and proximal deep vein thrombosis of the lower extremities were less common.

Prevalence of Venous Thromboembolism and Anticoagulant Use in Patients with COVID-19 in Alberta, Canada

Background

COVID-19 causes a hypercoagulable state and increases the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE).

Objectives

The primary objective was to identify VTE prevalence among patients with COVID-19 in one Canadian province. Secondary objectives were to identify the prevalence of bleeding, describe anticoagulation prescribing practices, and identify factors contributing to VTE in these patients.

Methods

Adult patients admitted to Alberta hospitals between March and December 2020 with COVID-19 who had a length of stay of at least 72 hours were included in this retrospective study. VTE, bleeding events, and comorbidities were defined by International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision codes. Cases of VTE and controls (no VTE) were matched on the basis of age older than 60 years, active cancer, and length of stay for the full cohort, as well as for a subgroup of patients with d-dimer data available, to assess for factors associated with VTE.

Results

A total of 2544 patients were included. Median age was 66 years, 1461 patients (57.4%) were male, median weight was 77.7 kg, and median d-dimer level on admission was 1.00 mg/L. The prevalence of VTE was 3.7% (n = 93) and that of major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding was 4.9% (n = 125). Of the total population, 1224 patients (48.1%) had standard prophylactic-dose anticoagulation, 460 (18.1%) received only higher-dose anticoagulation, 248 (9.7%) received both prophylactic- and higher-dose anticoagulation, and 612 (24.1%) had no anticoagulation data. Logistic regression showed that only the presence of d-dimer above 3 mg/L was associated with a significant odds ratio for VTE (7.04, 95% confidence interval 2.43-20.84).

Conclusions

VTE prevalence among patients with COVID-19 was higher than baseline prevalence in Alberta. Analysis of prescribing practices demonstrated that a large proportion of patients received higher-dose anticoagulation.

Surgical coronary revascularization in patients with COVID-19; complications and outcomes: A retrospective cohort study

Background and Aims

Coronary artery disease is high-risk comorbidity of COVID-19 infection. Nonelective coronary artery revascularization in COVID-19 patients carries substantial risk. Therefore, it is essential to understand the risk factors and outcomes fully. This study aims to evaluate the prognosis of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study assesses 171 patients who underwent urgent and emergent CABG in Tehran Heart Center from March 2020 to September 2021. The patients were allocated to cases and controls based on COVID-19 infection status. Demographic and clinical features, alongside the complications and outcomes, were compared between the two groups.

Results

According to diagnostic criteria, 62 patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 (Case) and 109 patients had no COVID diagnosis (Control). Regarding the demographics and risk factors, hypertension was more prevalent among patients with COVID-19 (64.5% compared to 43.1% p= 0.007). Length of hospital stay, ventilation time, and intensive care unit (ICU) stay time were significantly higher in patients infected with COVID-19. Postoperative complications, including stroke, atrial fibrillation, pleural effusion, blood transfusion, and Inotrope use, were significantly higher in the case group. Mortality rates were also higher in COVID-19 patients with an odds ratio of 1.53; however, this difference is not statistically significant (p: 0.44, 95% CI = 0.50-4.01).

Conclusion

COVID-19 is associated with a significantly higher hospital stay, ventilation time, and ICU stay. Mortality rates are also higher, albeit insignificantly. Various postoperative complications are also higher with COVID-19.

Early-stage COVID-19 pandemic observations on pulmonary embolism using nationwide multi-institutional data harvesting

We introduce a multi-institutional data harvesting (MIDH) method for longitudinal observation of medical imaging utilization and reporting. By tracking both large-scale utilization and clinical imaging results data, the MIDH approach is targeted at measuring surrogates for important disease-related observational quantities over time. To quantitatively investigate its clinical applicability, we performed a retrospective multi-institutional study encompassing 13 healthcare systems throughout the United States before and after the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. Using repurposed software infrastructure of a commercial AI-based image analysis service, we harvested data on medical imaging service requests and radiology reports for 40,037 computed tomography pulmonary angiograms (CTPA) to evaluate for pulmonary embolism (PE). Specifically, we compared two 70-day observational periods, namely (i) a pre-pandemic control period from 11/25/2019 through 2/2/2020, and (ii) a period during the early COVID-19 pandemic from 3/8/2020 through 5/16/2020. Natural language processing (NLP) on final radiology reports served as the ground truth for identifying positive PE cases, where we found an NLP accuracy of 98% for classifying radiology reports as positive or negative for PE based on a manual review of 2,400 radiology reports. Fewer CTPA exams were performed during the early COVID-19 pandemic than during the pre-pandemic period (9806 vs. 12,106). However, the PE positivity rate was significantly higher (11.6 vs. 9.9%, p < 10^-4) with an excess of 92 PE cases during the early COVID-19 outbreak, i.e., ~1.3 daily PE cases more than statistically expected. Our results suggest that MIDH can contribute value as an exploratory tool, aiming at a better understanding of pandemic-related effects on healthcare.

A systematic review of biomarkers among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 predictive of venous thromboembolism: A communication from the Predictive and Diagnostic Variables Scientific and Standardization Committee of the ISTH

Background

Thrombosis is reported to occur more often among patients with COVID-19 than otherwise expected in the setting of viral pneumonia and sepsis. Systemic inflammatory biomarkers may be associated with venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk. The ISTH subcommittee on Predictive and Diagnostic Variables in Thrombotic Disease aimed to report the evidence on prognostic biomarkers for VTE in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Methods

Using a standardized Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis methodology, we conducted a systematic literature review to identify studies reporting prognostic biomarkers for VTE among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Eligible studies included adults hospitalized with COVID-19 and reported the prognostic associations between any biomarker measured on admission, and the subsequent diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Two authors reviewed titles and abstracts, and three authors extracted study data and performed review of bias. Results were displayed descriptively. Meta-analysis was not possible.

Results

From the initial 196 identified studies, full-text review was performed for 72 studies. Admission D-dimer levels were associated with VTE during hospitalization in five studies, and elevated platelet count was associated with VTE during hospitalization in one study. The risk of bias ranged from low to high for included studies. Overall, there was a paucity of high-quality prognostic studies. Studies on other biomarkers did not meet the systematic review inclusion criteria.

Conclusions

Admission D-dimer was associated with VTE diagnosis during hospitalization for COVID-19; however, prospective validation of this finding is needed to identify optimal D-dimer thresholds to guide VTE prophylaxis measures.

3D-PAST: Risk Assessment Model for Predicting Venous Thromboembolism in COVID-19

Hypercoagulability is a recognized feature in SARS-CoV-2 infection. There exists a need for a dedicated risk assessment model (RAM) that can risk-stratify hospitalized COVID-19 patients for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and guide anticoagulation. We aimed to build a simple clinical model to predict VTE in COVID-19 patients. This large-cohort, retrospective study included adult patients admitted to four hospitals with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Model training was performed on 3531 patients hospitalized between March and December 2020 and validated on 2508 patients hospitalized between January and September 2021. Diagnosis of VTE was defined as acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE). The novel RAM was based on commonly available parameters at hospital admission. LASSO regression and logistic regression were performed, risk scores were assigned to the significant variables, and cutoffs were derived. Seven variables with assigned scores were delineated as: DVT History = 2; High D-Dimer (>500−2000 ng/mL) = 2; Very High D-Dimer (>2000 ng/mL) = 5; PE History = 2; Low Albumin (<3.5 g/dL) = 1; Systolic Blood Pressure <120 mmHg = 1, Tachycardia (heart rate >100 bpm) = 1. The model had a sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 53%. This simple, robust clinical tool can help individualize thromboprophylaxis for COVID-19 patients based on their VTE risk category.

Full Characterization of Thrombotic Events in All Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in a Spanish Tertiary Hospital during the First 18 Months of the Pandemic

The presence of a procoagulant state, COVID-19-related coagulopathy, and an increased rate of thrombotic events (TEs) is widely known about. However, descriptive studies are scarce. Here, we conducted a large retrospective study including 2894 hospitalized COVID-19 patients followed up during the first 18 months of the pandemic to completely characterize any TE. Major TEs showed a 3.45% incidence rate. TEs were associated with increased intubation/90-day mortality risk [OR = 1.71, 95% CI (1.12−2.61), p < 0.013]. Venous thrombotic events (VTEs) were more frequent than arterial thrombotic events (ATEs) (72% vs. 28%), associated with enhanced levels of D-dimer (cross-linked fibrin derivatives formed during thrombolysis), which were related to mortality but more useful for early detection of thrombosis. In this regard, D-dimer plasma levels above 2014 µg/mL at hospital admission identify TEs with 91% accuracy (AUC = 0.91, p < 0.001), rising to almost 95% (AUC = 0.94, p < 0.001) with a cut-off value of 2666 µg/mL in VTEs. Moreover, 41% of TEs occurred in patients receiving LMWH thromboprophylactic treatments in hospital or domiciliary therapies. SARS-CoV-2 infection along with a sedentary lifestyle derived from the confinement in 2020 could be more determinant than a procoagulant state in patients with risk factors for TEs. Furthermore, the normal results obtained from the thrombophilia study after the acute process are linked to this independent procoagulant state and to SARS-CoV-2-derived coagulopathy.

Cardiac Registries During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons Learned

PURPOSE OF THIS REVIEW

We discuss the role of observational studies and cardiac registries during the COVID-19 pandemic. We focus on published cardiac registries and highlight contributions to the field that have had clinical implications.

RECENT FINDINGS

We included observational studies of COVID-19 patients published in peer-reviewed medical journals with defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, defined study design, and primary outcomes. A PubMed and MEDLINE literature review results in 437 articles, of which 52 include patients with COVID-19 with cardiac endpoints. From July 2020 to December 2021, the average time from last data collected to publication was 8.9 ± 4.1 months, with an increasing trend over time (R = 0.9444, p < 0.0001). Of the 52 articles that met our inclusion criteria, we summarize main findings of 4 manuscripts on stroke, 14 on acute coronary syndrome, 4 on cardiac arrest, 7 on heart failure, 7 on venous thromboembolism, 5 on dysrhythmia, and 11 on different populations at risk for cardiovascular. Registries are cost effective, not disruptive to essential health services, and can be rapidly disseminated with short intervals between last data point collected and publication. In less than 2 years, cardiac registries have filled important gaps in knowledge and informed the care of COVID-19 patients with cardiovascular conditions.

Venous thromboembolism in COVID-19 patients and prediction model: a multicenter cohort study

Background

Patients with COVID-19 infection are commonly reported to have an increased risk of venous thrombosis. The choice of anti-thrombotic agents and doses are currently being studied in randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies. There exists a need for individualized risk stratification of venous thromboembolism (VTE) to assist clinicians in decision-making on anticoagulation. We sought to identify the risk factors of VTE in COVID-19 patients, which could help physicians in the prevention, early identification, and management of VTE in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and improve clinical outcomes in these patients.

Method

This is a multicenter, retrospective database of four main health systems in Southeast Michigan, United States. We compiled comprehensive data for adult COVID-19 patients who were admitted between 1st March 2020 and 31st December 2020. Four models, including the random forest, multiple logistic regression, multilinear regression, and decision trees, were built on the primary outcome of in-hospital acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) and tested for performance. The study also reported hospital length of stay (LOS) and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS in the VTE and the non-VTE patients. Four models were assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and confusion matrix.

Results

The cohort included 3531 admissions, 3526 had discharge diagnoses, and 6.68% of patients developed acute VTE (N = 236). VTE group had a longer hospital and ICU LOS than the non-VTE group (hospital LOS 12.2 days vs. 8.8 days, p < 0.001; ICU LOS 3.8 days vs. 1.9 days, p < 0.001). 9.8% of patients in the VTE group required more advanced oxygen support, compared to 2.7% of patients in the non-VTE group (p < 0.001). Among all four models, the random forest model had the best performance. The model suggested that blood pressure, electrolytes, renal function, hepatic enzymes, and inflammatory markers were predictors for in-hospital VTE in COVID-19 patients.

Conclusions

Patients with COVID-19 have a high risk for VTE, and patients who developed VTE had a prolonged hospital and ICU stay. This random forest prediction model for VTE in COVID-19 patients identifies predictors which could aid physicians in making a clinical judgment on empirical dosages of anticoagulation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07421-3.

Venous Thromboembolism in COVID-19 Compared to Non-COVID-19 Cohorts: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Background: A high incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is reported in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, in particular in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). In patients with respiratory tract infections, including influenza A (H1N1), many studies have demonstrated an increased incidence of thromboses, but evidence is lacking regarding the risk difference (RD) of the occurrence of VTE between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Methods: In this systematic review with meta-analysis, we evaluated the RD of the occurrence of VTE, pulmonary embolism (PE), and deep venous thrombosis (DVT) between COVID-19 and other pulmonary infection cohorts, in particular H1N1, and in an ICU setting. We searched for all studies comparing COVID-19 vs. non-COVID-19 regarding VTE, PE, and DVT. Results: The systematic review included 12 studies and 1,013,495 patients. The RD for VTE in COVID-19 compared to non-COVID-19 patients was 0.06 (95% CI 0.11–0.25, p = 0.011, I² = 97%), and 0.16 in ICU (95% CI 0.045–0.27, p = 0.006, I² = 80%). The RD for PE between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients was 0.03 (95% CI, 0.006–0.045, p = 0.01, I² = 89%). The RD for PE between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients was 0.021 in retrospective studies (95% CI 0.00–0.04, p = 0.048, I² = 92%) and 0.11 in ICU studies (95% CI 0.06–0.16, p < 0.001, I² = 0%). Conclusions: The growing awareness and understanding of a massive inflammatory response combined with a hypercoagulable state that predisposes patients to thrombosis in COVID-19, in particular in the ICU, may contribute to a more appropriate strategy of prevention and earlier detection of the thrombotic events.

Arterial and venous thromboembolism in COVID-19: a study-level meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of venous thromboembolic event (VTE) and arterial thromboembolic event (ATE) thromboembolic events in patients with COVID-19 remains largely unknown.

METHODS

In this meta-analysis, we systematically searched for observational studies describing the prevalence of VTE and ATE in COVID-19 up to 30 September 2020.

RESULTS

We analysed findings from 102 studies (64 503 patients). The frequency of COVID-19-related VTE was 14.7% (95% CI 12.1% to 17.6%, I2=94%; 56 studies; 16 507 patients). The overall prevalence rates of pulmonary embolism (PE) and leg deep vein thrombosis were 7.8% (95% CI 6.2% to 9.4%, I2=94%; 66 studies; 23 117 patients) and 11.2% (95% CI 8.4% to 14.3%, I2=95%; 48 studies; 13 824 patients), respectively. Few were isolated subsegmental PE. The VTE prevalence was significantly higher in intensive care unit (ICU) (23.2%, 95% CI 17.5% to 29.6%, I2=92%, vs 9.0%, 95% CI 6.9% to 11.4%, I2=95%; pinteraction<0.0001) and in series systematically screening patients compared with series testing symptomatic patients (25.2% vs 12.7%, pinteraction=0.04). The frequency rates of overall ATE, acute coronary syndrome, stroke and other ATE were 3.9% (95% CI 2.0% to to 3.0%, I2=96%; 16 studies; 7939 patients), 1.6% (95% CI 1.0% to 2.2%, I2=93%; 27 studies; 40 597 patients) and 0.9% (95% CI 0.5% to 1.5%, I2=84%; 17 studies; 20 139 patients), respectively. Metaregression and subgroup analyses failed to explain heterogeneity of overall ATE. High heterogeneity limited the value of estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients admitted in the ICU for severe COVID-19 had a high risk of VTE. Conversely, further studies are needed to determine the specific effects of COVID-19 on the risk of ATE or VTE in less severe forms of the disease.

Acute pulmonary embolism in patients presenting pulmonary deterioration after hospitalisation for non-critical COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Emerging evidence suggests an association between COVID-19 and acute pulmonary embolism (APE).

AIMS

To assess the prevalence of APE in patients hospitalised for non-critical COVID-19 who presented clinical deterioration, and to investigate the association of clinical and biochemical variables with a confirmed diagnosis of APE in these subjects.

METHODS

All consecutive patients admitted to the internal medicine department of a general hospital with a diagnosis of non-critical COVID-19, who performed a computer tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) for respiratory deterioration in April 2020, were included in this retrospective cohort study.

RESULTS

Study populations: 41 subjects, median (interquartile range) age: 71.7 (63-76) years, CPTA confirmed APE = 8 (19.51%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 8.82-34.87%). Among patients with and without APE, no significant differences were found with regards symptoms, comorbidities, treatment, Wells score and outcomes. The optimal cut-off value of d-dimer for predicting APE was 2454 ng/mL, sensitivity (95% CI): 63 (24-91), specificity: 73 (54-87), positive predictive value: 36 (13-65), negative predictive value: 89 (71-98) and AUC: 0.62 (0.38-0.85). The standard and age-adjusted d-dimer cut-offs, and the Wells score ≥2 did not associate with confirmed APE, albeit a cut-off value of d-dimer = 2454 ng/mL showed an relative risk: 3.21; 95% CI: 0.92-13.97; P = 0.073. Heparin at anticoagulant doses was used in 70.73% of patients before performing CTPA.

CONCLUSION

Among patients presenting pulmonary deterioration after hospitalisation for non-critical COVID-19, the prevalence of APE is high. Traditional diagnostic tools to identify high APE pre-test probability patients do not seem to be clinically useful. These results support the use of a high index of suspicion for performing CTPA to exclude or confirm APE as the most appropriate diagnostic approach in this clinical setting.

Venous thromboembolism in COVID-19 compared to non-COVID-19 cohorts: A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Many studies confirmed an association between COVID-19 and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Whether the risk of VTE significantly differed between COVID-19 cohorts and non-COVID-19 cohorts with similar disease severity remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to compare the rate of VTE between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cohorts with similar disease severity.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (MEDLINE, Embase and Google Scholar) was conducted from January 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021 to identify studies reporting VTE in COVID-19. Relative risks (RR) were estimated for the effect measure with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Seven studies (41,768 patients) evaluated VTE in COVID-19 cohorts compared to non-COVID-19 cohorts. The overall risk of VTE (RR 1.18; 95%CI 0.79-1.77; p = 0.42; I² = 54%), pulmonary embolism (RR 1.25; 95%CI 0.77-2.03; p = 0.36; I² = 52%) and deep venous thrombosis (RR 0.92; 95%CI 0.52-1.65; p = 0.78; I² = 0%) did not significantly differ between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cohorts. However, subgroup analyses suggested an increased risk of VTE amongst CODID-19 versus non COVID-19 cohorts when only patients hospitalized within the intensive care unit (ICU) were considered (RR 3.10; 95%CI 1.54-6.23), which was not observed in cohorts of predominantly non-ICU patients (RR 0.95; 95%CI 0.81-1.11) (P_interaction = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There was no signal for a difference in VTE in COVID-19 cohorts compared to non-COVID-19 cohorts, except for the subgroup of patients hospitalized in the ICU. These results should be viewed as exploratory and further studies are needed to confirm these results.

A Review of Pathophysiology, Clinical Features, and Management Options of COVID-19 Associated Coagulopathy

ABSTRACT

There is increasing evidence that novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) leads to a significant coagulopathy, a phenomenon termed "COVID-19 associated coagulopathy." COVID-19 has been associated with increased rates of both venous and arterial thromboembolic events, a source of significant morbidity and mortality in this disease. Further evidence suggests a link between the inflammatory response and coagulopathy associated with COVID-19. This presents a unique set of challenges for diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of thrombotic complications. In this review, we summarize and discuss the current literature on laboratory coagulation disruptions associated with COVID-19 and the clinical effects of thromboembolic events including pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, peripheral arterial thrombosis, and acute ischemic stroke in COVID-19. Endothelial injury and augmented innate immune response are implicated in the development of diffuse macro- and microvascular thrombosis in COVID-19. The pathophysiology of COVID-19 associated coagulopathy is an important determinant of appropriate treatment and monitoring of these complications. We highlight the importance of diagnosis and management of dysregulated coagulation in COVID-19 to improve outcomes in COVID-19 patients with thromboembolic complications.

Cytokine adsorption in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (CYCOV): a single centre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial

Background

We sought to clarify the benefit of cytokine adsorption in patients with COVID-19 supported with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

Methods

We did a single-centre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial to investigate cytokine adsorption in adult patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring ECMO. Patients with COVID-19 selected for ECMO at the Freiburg University Medical Center (Freiburg, Germany) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive cytokine adsorption using the CytoSorb device or not. Randomisation was computer-generated, allocation was concealed by opaque, sequentially numbered sealed envelopes. The CytoSorb device was incorporated into the ECMO circuit before connection to the patient circuit, replaced every 24 h, and removed after 72 h. The primary endpoint was serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) concentration 72 h after initiation of ECMO analysed by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints included 30-day survival. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04324528) and the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00021300) and is closed.

Findings

From March 29, 2020, to Dec 29, 2020, of 34 patients assessed for eligibility, 17 (50%) were treated with cytokine adsorption and 17 (50%) without. Median IL-6 decreased from 357·0 pg/mL to 98·6 pg/mL in patients randomly assigned to cytokine adsorption and from 289·0 pg/mL to 112·0 pg/mL in the control group after 72 h. One patient in each group died before 72 h. Adjusted mean log IL-6 concentrations after 72 h were 0·30 higher in the cytokine adsorption group (95% CI −0·70 to 1·30, p=0·54). Survival after 30 days was three (18%) of 17 with cytokine adsorption and 13 (76%) of 17 without cytokine adsorption (p=0·0016).

Interpretation

Early initiation of cytokine adsorption in patients with severe COVID-19 and venovenous ECMO did not reduce serum IL-6 and had a negative effect on survival. Cytokine adsorption should not be used during the first days of ECMO support in COVID-19.

Funding

None.

Incidence of VTE and Bleeding Among Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Individual studies have reported widely variable rates for VTE and bleeding among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the incidence of VTE and bleeding among hospitalized patients with COVID-19?

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, 15 standard sources and COVID-19-specific sources were searched between January 1, 2020, and July 31, 2020, with no restriction according to language. Incidence estimates were pooled by using random effects meta-analyses. Heterogeneity was evaluated by using the I² statistic, and publication bias was assessed by using the Begg and Egger tests.

RESULTS

The pooled incidence was 17.0% (95% CI, 13.4-20.9) for VTE, 12.1% (95% CI, 8.4-16.4) for DVT, 7.1% (95% CI, 5.3-9.1) for pulmonary embolism (PE), 7.8% (95% CI, 2.6-15.3) for bleeding, and 3.9% (95% CI, 1.2-7.9) for major bleeding. In subgroup meta-analyses, the incidence of VTE was higher when assessed according to screening (33.1% vs 9.8% by clinical diagnosis), among patients in the ICU (27.9% vs 7.1% in the ward), in prospective studies (25.5% vs 12.4% in retrospective studies), and with the inclusion of catheter-associated thrombosis/isolated distal DVTs and isolated subsegmental PEs. The highest pooled incidence estimate of bleeding was reported for patients receiving intermediate- or full-dose anticoagulation (21.4%) and the lowest in the only prospective study that assessed bleeding events (2.7%).

INTERPRETATION

Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, the overall estimated pooled incidence of VTE was 17.0%, with higher rates with routine screening, inclusion of distal DVT, and subsegmental PE, in critically ill patients and in prospective studies. Bleeding events were observed in 7.8% of patients and were sensitive to use of escalated doses of anticoagulants and nature of data collection. Additional studies are required to ascertain the significance of various thrombotic events and to identify strategies to improve patient outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRY

PROSPERO; No.: CRD42020198864; URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

Risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is frequently observed in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, reported VTE rates differ substantially.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed at evaluating available data and estimating the prevalence of VTE in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, World Health Organization COVID-19 database) to identify studies reporting VTE rates in patients with COVID-19. Studies with suspected high risk of bias were excluded from quantitative synthesis. Pooled outcome rates were obtained within a random effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed for different settings (intensive care unit [ICU] vs non-ICU hospitalization and screening vs no screening) and the association of d-dimer levels and VTE risk was explored.

RESULTS

Eighty-six studies (33,970 patients) were identified and 66 (28,173 patients, mean age: 62.6 years, 60.1% men, 19.4% ICU patients) were included in quantitative analysis. The overall VTE prevalence estimate was 14.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.6-16.9), 40.3% (95% CI, 27.0-54.3) with ultrasound screening and 9.5% (95% CI, 7.5-11.7) without screening. Subgroup analysis revealed high heterogeneity, with a VTE prevalence of 7.9% (95% CI, 5.1-11.2) in non-ICU and 22.7% (95% CI, 18.1-27.6) in ICU patients. Prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in non-ICU and ICU patients was 3.5% (95% CI, 2.2-5.1) and 13.7% (95% CI, 10.0-17.9). Patients developing VTE had higher d-dimer levels (weighted mean difference, 3.26 µg/mL; 95% CI, 2.76-3.77) than non-VTE patients.

CONCLUSION

VTE occurs in 22.7% of patients with COVID-19 in the ICU, but VTE risk is also increased in non-ICU hospitalized patients. Patients developing VTE had higher d-dimer levels. Studies evaluating thromboprophylaxis strategies in patients with COVID-19 are needed to improve prevention of VTE.

Risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is frequently observed in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, reported VTE rates differ substantially.

Objectives

We aimed at evaluating available data and estimating the prevalence of VTE in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, World Health Organization COVID-19 database) to identify studies reporting VTE rates in patients with COVID-19. Studies with suspected high risk of bias were excluded from quantitative synthesis. Pooled outcome rates were obtained within a random effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed for different settings (intensive care unit [ICU] vs non-ICU hospitalization and screening vs no screening) and the association of d-dimer levels and VTE risk was explored.

Results

Eighty-six studies (33,970 patients) were identified and 66 (28,173 patients, mean age: 62.6 years, 60.1% men, 19.4% ICU patients) were included in quantitative analysis. The overall VTE prevalence estimate was 14.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.6-16.9), 40.3% (95% CI, 27.0-54.3) with ultrasound screening and 9.5% (95% CI, 7.5-11.7) without screening. Subgroup analysis revealed high heterogeneity, with a VTE prevalence of 7.9% (95% CI, 5.1-11.2) in non-ICU and 22.7% (95% CI, 18.1-27.6) in ICU patients. Prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in non-ICU and ICU patients was 3.5% (95% CI, 2.2-5.1) and 13.7% (95% CI, 10.0-17.9). Patients developing VTE had higher d-dimer levels (weighted mean difference, 3.26 µg/mL; 95% CI, 2.76-3.77) than non-VTE patients.

Conclusion

VTE occurs in 22.7% of patients with COVID-19 in the ICU, but VTE risk is also increased in non-ICU hospitalized patients. Patients developing VTE had higher d-dimer levels. Studies evaluating thromboprophylaxis strategies in patients with COVID-19 are needed to improve prevention of VTE.