-
1.
Electrolyte imbalances as poor prognostic markers in COVID-19: a systemic review and meta-analysis.
Song, HJJMD, Chia, AZQ, Tan, BKJ, Teo, CB, Lim, V, Chua, HR, Samuel, M, Kee, A
Journal of endocrinological investigation. 2023;46(2):235-259
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Salt imbalances in individuals with Covid-19 are highly prevalent, however it is not fully understood if they determine whether a patient has a good or bad prognosis. This systematic review and meta-analysis of 28 observational studies aimed to determine the associations and prognostic value of different salt imbalances in individuals with Covid-19. The results showed that out of several salt imbalances analysed, high and low sodium levels and low calcium levels could predict poor outcomes in those with Covid-19. High sodium levels were particularly indicative, but this was not due to the relationship between high sodium and inflammation in the body and causal reasons remained undiscovered. It was concluded that sodium imbalances and low calcium levels were associated with poor clinical outcomes in individuals with Covid-19. This study could be used by healthcare professionals to understand that correcting these imbalances may be of benefit to individuals with Covid-19.
Abstract
PURPOSE Serum electrolyte imbalances are highly prevalent in COVID-19 patients. However, their associations with COVID-19 outcomes are inconsistent, and of unknown prognostic value. We aim to systematically clarify the associations and prognostic accuracy of electrolyte imbalances (sodium, calcium, potassium, magnesium, chloride and phosphate) in predicting poor COVID-19 clinical outcome. METHODS PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched. Odds of poor clinical outcome (a composite of mortality, intensive-care unit (ICU) admission, need for respiratory support and acute respiratory distress syndrome) were pooled using mixed-effects models. The associated prognostic sensitivity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR + , LR-) and predictive values (PPV, NPV; assuming 25% pre-test probability), and area under the curve (AUC) were computed. RESULTS We included 28 observational studies from 953 records with low to moderate risk-of-bias. Hyponatremia (OR = 2.08, 95% CI = 1.48-2.94, I2 = 93%, N = 8), hypernatremia (OR = 4.32, 95% CI = 3.17-5.88, I2 = 45%, N = 7) and hypocalcemia (OR = 3.31, 95% CI = 2.24-4.88, I2 = 25%, N = 6) were associated with poor COVID-19 outcome. These associations remained significant on adjustment for covariates such as demographics and comorbidities. Hypernatremia was 97% specific in predicting poor outcome (LR + 4.0, PPV = 55%, AUC = 0.80) despite no differences in CRP and IL-6 levels between hypernatremic and normonatremic patients. Hypocalcemia was 76% sensitive in predicting poor outcome (LR- 0.44, NPV = 87%, AUC = 0.71). Overall quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. CONCLUSION Hyponatremia, hypernatremia and hypocalcemia are associated with poor COVID-19 clinical outcome. Hypernatremia is 97% specific for a poor outcome, and the association is independent of inflammatory marker levels. Further studies should evaluate if correcting these imbalances help improve clinical outcome.
-
2.
Effects of mild/asymptomatic COVID-19 on semen parameters and sex-related hormone levels in men: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Che, BW, Chen, P, Yu, Y, Li, W, Huang, T, Zhang, WJ, Xu, SH, He, J, Liu, M, Tang, KF
Asian journal of andrology. 2023;25(3):382-388
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Various studies have shown that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause more harm and a higher mortality rate to men. However, the literature does not clearly show that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can cause serious and lasting damage to male reproductive function. The aims of this study were to explore the effects of mild/asymptomatic COVID-19 on semen parameters and sex-related hormone levels and to analyse the relationship between semen parameter values and semen collection time after infection, fever, and severity of COVID-19. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of thirteen studies of which only five were included in the meta-analysis. Results show that COVID-19 has a certain effect on male reproductive function in the short term especially within about 70 days after infection. Additionally, fever after infection only had a significant effect on sperm concentration. Authors conclude by recommending the avoidance of pregnancy for a short period of time when the male partner has been infected with COVID-19.
Abstract
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has yet to be proven to alter male reproductive function, particularly in the majority of mild/asymptomatic patients. The purpose of this study was to explore whether mild/asymptomatic COVID-19 affects semen quality and sex-related hormone levels. To find suitable comparative studies, a systematic review and meta-analysis was done up to January 22, 2022, by using multiple databases (Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to identify and choose the studies. Meta-analysis was used to examine the semen parameters and sex-related hormones of mild/asymptomatic COVID-19 patients before and after infection. The effects of semen collection time, fever, and intensity of verification on semen following infection were also investigated. A total of 13 studies (n = 770) were included in the analysis, including three case-control studies, six pre-post studies, and four single-arm studies. A meta-analysis of five pre-post studies showed that after infection with COVID-19, sperm concentration (I2 = 0; P = 0.003), total sperm count (I2 = 46.3%; P = 0.043), progressive motility (I2 = 50.0%; P < 0.001), total sperm motility (I2 = 76.1%; P = 0.047), and normal sperm morphology (I2 = 0; P = 0.001) decreased. Simultaneously, a systematic review of 13 studies found a significant relationship between semen collection time after infection, inflammation severity, and semen parameter values, with fever having only bearing on semen concentration. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in sex-related hormone levels before and after infection in mild/asymptomatic patients. Mild/asymptomatic COVID-19 infection had a significant effect on semen quality in the short term. It is recommended to avoid initiating a pregnancy during this period of time.
-
3.
Prognostic and Therapeutic Role of Vitamin D in COVID-19: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Dissanayake, HA, de Silva, NL, Sumanatilleke, M, de Silva, SDN, Gamage, KKK, Dematapitiya, C, Kuruppu, DC, Ranasinghe, P, Pathmanathan, S, Katulanda, P
The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism. 2022;107(5):1484-1502
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Vitamin D is implicated in optimum function of the immune system. Its deficiency has been linked to susceptibility to respiratory infections. It is postulated that vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency is also associated with COVID-19. The aim of this study was to determine the association between vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency and susceptibility to COVID-19, its severity, mortality and role of vitamin D in its treatment. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of seventy-six publications. Results show increased odds of developing COVID-19, progression to severe COVID-19 and death in people with vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency. In fact, people who developed COVID-19, severe COVID-19 and fatal disease had lower 25-hydroxy vitamin D concentration compared to people without COVID-19 or non-severe COVID-19 or non-fatal COVID-19 respectively. Authors conclude that Vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency may increase the risk of developing COVID-19 infection and susceptibility to more severe disease.
Abstract
PURPOSE Vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency may increase the susceptibility to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to determine the association between vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency and susceptibility to COVID-19, its severity, mortality, and role of vitamin D in its treatment. METHODS We searched CINAHL, Cochrane library, EMBASE, PubMED, Scopus, and Web of Science up to May 30, 2021, for observational studies on association between vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency and susceptibility to COVID-19, severe disease, and death among adults, and, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing vitamin D treatment against standard care or placebo, in improving severity or mortality among adults with COVID-19. Risk of bias was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies and AUB-KQ1 Cochrane tool for RCTs. Study-level data were analyzed using RevMan 5.3 and R (v4.1.0). Heterogeneity was determined by I2 and sources were explored through prespecified sensitivity analyses, subgroup analyses, and meta-regressions. RESULTS Of 1877 search results, 76 studies satisfying eligibility criteria were included. Seventy-two observational studies were included in the meta-analysis (n = 1 976 099). Vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency increased the odds of developing COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR] 1.46; 95% CI, 1.28-1.65; P < 0.0001; I2 = 92%), severe disease (OR 1.90; 95% CI, 1.52-2.38; P < 0.0001; I2 = 81%), and death (OR 2.07; 95% CI, 1.28-3.35; P = 0.003; I2 = 73%). The 25-hydroxy vitamin D concentrations were lower in individuals with COVID-19 compared with controls (mean difference [MD] -3.85 ng/mL; 95% CI, -5.44 to -2.26; P ≤ 0.0001), in patients with severe COVID-19 compared with controls with nonsevere COVID-19 (MD -4.84 ng/mL; 95% CI, -7.32 to -2.35; P = 0.0001) and in nonsurvivors compared with survivors (MD -4.80 ng/mL; 95% CI, -7.89 to -1.71; P = 0.002). The association between vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency and death was insignificant when studies with high risk of bias or studies reporting unadjusted effect estimates were excluded. Risk of bias and heterogeneity were high across all analyses. Discrepancies in timing of vitamin D testing, definitions of severe COVID-19, and vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency partly explained the heterogeneity. Four RCTs were widely heterogeneous precluding meta-analysis. CONCLUSION Multiple observational studies involving nearly 2 million adults suggest vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency increases susceptibility to COVID-19 and severe COVID-19, although with a high risk of bias and heterogeneity. Association with mortality was less robust. Heterogeneity in RCTs precluded their meta-analysis.
-
4.
Effects of Vitamin D Serum Level on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Hu, Y, Kung, J, Cave, A, Banh, HL
Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques. 2022;25:84-92
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome resulting from the excessive inflammatory response at 5-7 days. It has been shown that low Vitamin D serum concentration is associated with increased pneumonia and viral respiratory infections. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical effects of Vitamin D serum concentration in COVID-19 patients. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of 20 studies. Results show that Vitamin D serum concentration was not statistically associated with mortality and ICU admission, ventilator support requirement, and length of hospital stay. Authors conclude that additional randomized controlled trials are required to provide a specific supplemental vitamin dose and Vitamin D serum concentration.
Abstract
PURPOSE It has been shown that low Vitamin D serum concentration is associated with increased pneumonia and viral respiratory infections. Vitamin D is readily available, inexpensive, and easy to administer to subjects infected with COVID-19. If effective in reducing the severity of COVID-19, it could be an important and feasible therapeutic intervention. METHODS We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to determine the effects of Vitamin D serum concentration on mortality and morbidity in COVID-19 patients. The primary objectives were to determine if Vitamin D serum concentration decrease mortality, ICU admissions, ventilator support, and length of hospital stay in COVID-19 patients. RESULTS A total of 3572 publications were identified. Ultimately, 20 studies are included. A total of 12,806 patients aged between 42 to 81 years old were analyzed. The pooled estimated RR for mortality, ICU admission, ventilator support and length of hospital stay were 1.49 (95% CI: 1.34, 1.65), 0.87 (95% CI: 0.67, 1.14), 1.29 (95% CI: 0.79, 1.84), and 0.84 (95% CI -0.45, 2.13). CONCLUSION There is no statistical difference in mortality, ICU admission rate, ventilator support requirement, and length of hospital stay in COVID-19 patients with low and high Vitamin D serum concentration.
-
5.
Association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and disease severity among prostate cancer patients on androgen deprivation therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Sari Motlagh, R, Abufaraj, M, Karakiewicz, PI, Rajwa, P, Mori, K, Mun, DH, Shariat, SF
World journal of urology. 2022;40(4):907-914
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
The incidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is equal in both sexes; however, disease severity and progression rates are approximately three times higher in the male gender. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and the second-generation androgen receptor targeting therapy were developed to suppress the androgen-activated intracellular cascade that leads to tumour progression and aggressive tumour growth. The aim of this study was to assess the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the severity of disease in prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with ADT. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of six cohort studies. The study results show that there is not a significant association between ADT use and the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection or coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in PCa patients. However, results also show that ADT does not worsen COVID-19 risk and trajectory. Authors conclude that ADT, as a cancer treatment, might be safely administered to patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Abstract
PURPOSE Androgen-regulated enzymes such as the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and the transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2) are involved in the SARS-CoV-2 infection process. The expression of TMPRSS2 and its fusion gene, which are increased in the epithelium of the human prostate gland during prostate carcinogenesis, are regulated by androgens. Our goal was to assess the risk of the SARS-CoV-2 infection and the severity of the disease in PCa patients treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). METHODS We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines. We queried PubMed and Web of Science databases on 1 July 2021. We used random- and/or fixed-effects meta-analytic models in the presence or absence of heterogeneity according to Cochrane's Q test and I2 statistic, respectively. RESULTS Six retrospective studies (n = 50,220 patients) were selected after considering inclusion and exclusion criteria for qualitative evidence synthesis. Four retrospective studies were included to assess the SARS-CoV-2 infection risk in PCa patients under ADT vs. no ADT and the summarized risk ratio (RR) was 0.8 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.44-1.47). Five retrospective studies were included to assess the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in PCa patients under ADT versus no ADT and the summarized RR was 1.23 (95% CI 0.9-1.68). CONCLUSION We found a non-significant association between the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity in PCa patients treated with ADT. However, our results suggest that during the COVID-19 pandemic PCa patients can safely undergo ADT as a cancer therapy without worsening COVID-19 risk and trajectory.
-
6.
Efficacy of telemedicine for the management of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Kuan, PX, Chan, WK, Fern Ying, DK, Rahman, MAA, Peariasamy, KM, Lai, NM, Mills, NL, Anand, A
The Lancet. Digital health. 2022;4(9):e676-e691
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Digital health interventions (DHIs) have the potential to transform the diagnosis, monitoring, and management of chronic cardiovascular conditions. Many DHIs are widely deployed in health systems across the world, with adoption rapidly increasing in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The aim of this study was to provide an updated synthesis of evidence on the effectiveness of telemedicine in the management of cardiovascular diseases. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of seventy-two studies with a total of 127,869 participants, of whom 82,818 (65%) were males and 45051 (35%) were females. Results showed reduced cardiovascular-related mortality and hospitalisation for patients with heart failure who received combined remote telemedicine monitoring and consultation compared with usual care. Authors conclude that the findings of their study suggest a definite role for telemedicine in the management of heart failure, particularly in early treatment optimisation, but the value is less clear for long-term management strategy and other cardiovascular diseases. Thus, future research should focus to address the application of these technologies to unselected populations and longer-term effectiveness.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Telemedicine has been increasingly integrated into chronic disease management through remote patient monitoring and consultation, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting effectiveness of telemedicine interventions for the management of patients with cardiovascular conditions. METHODS In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library from database inception to Jan 18, 2021. We included randomised controlled trials and observational or cohort studies that evaluated the effects of a telemedicine intervention on cardiovascular outcomes for people either at risk (primary prevention) of cardiovascular disease or with established (secondary prevention) cardiovascular disease, and, for the meta-analysis, we included studies that evaluated the effects of a telemedicine intervention on cardiovascular outcomes and risk factors. We excluded studies if there was no clear telemedicine intervention described or if cardiovascular or risk factor outcomes were not clearly reported in relation to the intervention. Two reviewers independently assessed and extracted data from trials and observational and cohort studies using a standardised template. Our primary outcome was cardiovascular-related mortality. We evaluated study quality using Cochrane risk-of-bias and Newcastle-Ottawa scales. The systematic review and the meta-analysis protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021221010) and the Malaysian National Medical Research Register (NMRR-20-2471-57236). FINDINGS 72 studies, including 127 869 participants, met eligibility criteria, with 34 studies included in meta-analysis (n=13 269 with 6620 [50%] receiving telemedicine). Combined remote monitoring and consultation for patients with heart failure was associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular-related mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0·83 [95% CI 0·70 to 0·99]; p=0·036) and hospitalisation for a cardiovascular cause (0·71 [0·58 to 0·87]; p=0·0002), mostly in studies with short-term follow-up. There was no effect of telemedicine on all-cause hospitalisation (1·02 [0·94 to 1·10]; p=0·71) or mortality (0·90 [0·77 to 1·06]; p=0·23) in these groups, and no benefits were observed with remote consultation in isolation. Small reductions were observed for systolic blood pressure (mean difference -3·59 [95% CI -5·35 to -1·83] mm Hg; p<0·0001) by remote monitoring and consultation in secondary prevention populations. Small reductions were also observed in body-mass index (mean difference -0·38 [-0·66 to -0·11] kg/m2; p=0·0064) by remote consultation in primary prevention settings. INTERPRETATION Telemedicine including both remote disease monitoring and consultation might reduce short-term cardiovascular-related hospitalisation and mortality risk among patients with heart failure. Future research should evaluate the sustained effects of telemedicine interventions. FUNDING The British Heart Foundation.
-
7.
Vitamin D supplementation for the treatment of COVID-19: a living systematic review.
Stroehlein, JK, Wallqvist, J, Iannizzi, C, Mikolajewska, A, Metzendorf, MI, Benstoem, C, Meybohm, P, Becker, M, Skoetz, N, Stegemann, M, et al
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2021;5:CD015043
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
This study is part of a series of Cochrane Reviews investigating treatments and therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). COVID-19 is a rapidly spreading infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Therapeutic interventions to treat COVID-19 are being investigated with immense emphasis. Recently, vitamin D supplementation for treatment of COVID-19 gained attention, since studies suggested an association between vitamin D deficiency and risk or prognosis of the disease. The aim of this study was to assess whether vitamin D supplementation is effective and safe for the treatment of COVID-19 This study is a living systematic review of seven records (three randomised controlled studies – 356 adult participants). Results for the effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation for participants with COVID-19 are inconclusive. Moreover, inconsistency in the reporting of adverse and serious adverse events impeded evaluation of safety of vitamin D supplementation. Authors conclude that to elucidate the effectiveness and safety of vitamin D supplementation for individuals with COVID-19, more randomised controlled trials are needed.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The role of vitamin D supplementation as a treatment for COVID-19 has been a subject of considerable discussion. A thorough understanding of the current evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of vitamin D supplementation for COVID-19 based on randomised controlled trials is required. OBJECTIVES To assess whether vitamin D supplementation is effective and safe for the treatment of COVID-19 in comparison to an active comparator, placebo, or standard of care alone, and to maintain the currency of the evidence, using a living systematic review approach. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, Web of Science and the WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies without language restrictions to 11 March 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, age, gender or ethnicity. We excluded studies investigating preventive effects, or studies including populations with other coronavirus diseases (severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane risk of bias tool (ROB 2) for RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the following prioritised outcome categories: individuals with moderate or severe COVID-19: all-cause mortality, clinical status, quality of life, adverse events, serious adverse events, and for individuals with asymptomatic or mild disease: all-cause mortality, development of severe clinical COVID-19 symptoms, quality of life, adverse events, serious adverse events. MAIN RESULTS We identified three RCTs with 356 participants, of whom 183 received vitamin D. In accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) clinical progression scale, two studies investigated participants with moderate or severe disease, and one study individuals with mild or asymptomatic disease. The control groups consisted of placebo treatment or standard of care alone. Effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19 and moderate to severe disease We included two studies with 313 participants. Due to substantial clinical and methodological diversity of both studies, we were not able to pool data. Vitamin D status was unknown in one study, whereas the other study reported data for vitamin D deficient participants. One study administered multiple doses of oral calcifediol at days 1, 3 and 7, whereas the other study gave a single high dose of oral cholecalciferol at baseline. We assessed one study with low risk of bias for effectiveness outcomes, and the other with some concerns about randomisation and selective reporting. All-cause mortality at hospital discharge (313 participants) We found two studies reporting data for this outcome. One study reported no deaths when treated with vitamin D out of 50 participants, compared to two deaths out of 26 participants in the control group (Risk ratio (RR) 0.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 2.13). The other study reported nine deaths out of 119 individuals in the vitamin D group, whereas six participants out of 118 died in the placebo group (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.04]. We are very uncertain whether vitamin D has an effect on all-cause mortality at hospital discharge (very low-certainty evidence). Clinical status assessed by the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (237 participants) We found one study reporting data for this outcome. Nine out of 119 participants needed invasive mechanical ventilation when treated with vitamin D, compared to 17 out of 118 participants in the placebo group (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.13). Vitamin D supplementation may decrease need for invasive mechanical ventilation, but the evidence is uncertain (low-certainty evidence). Quality of life We did not find data for quality of life. Safety of vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19 and moderate to severe disease We did not include data from one study, because assessment of serious adverse events was not described and we are concerned that data might have been inconsistently measured. This study reported vomiting in one out of 119 participants immediately after vitamin D intake (RR 2.98, 95% CI 0.12 to 72.30). We are very uncertain whether vitamin D supplementation is associated with higher risk for adverse events (very low-certainty). Effectiveness and safety of vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19 and asymptomatic or mild disease We found one study including 40 individuals, which did not report our prioritised outcomes, but instead data for viral clearance, inflammatory markers, and vitamin D serum levels. The authors reported no events of hypercalcaemia, but recording and assessment of further adverse events remains unclear. Authors administered oral cholecalciferol in daily doses for at least 14 days, and continued with weekly doses if vitamin D blood levels were > 50 ng/mL. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is currently insufficient evidence to determine the benefits and harms of vitamin D supplementation as a treatment of COVID-19. The evidence for the effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation for the treatment of COVID-19 is very uncertain. Moreover, we found only limited safety information, and were concerned about consistency in measurement and recording of these outcomes. There was substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity of included studies, mainly because of different supplementation strategies, formulations, vitamin D status of participants, and reported outcomes. There is an urgent need for well-designed and adequately powered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with an appropriate randomisation procedure, comparability of study arms and preferably double-blinding. We identified 21 ongoing and three completed studies without published results, which indicates that these needs will be addressed and that our findings are subject to change in the future. Due to the living approach of this work, we will update the review periodically.
-
8.
Clinical applications of detecting IgG, IgM or IgA antibody for the diagnosis of COVID-19: A meta-analysis and systematic review.
Chen, M, Qin, R, Jiang, M, Yang, Z, Wen, W, Li, J
International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases. 2021;104:415-422
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The rapidly spreading nature of COVID-19 has put an emphasis on the importance of fast diagnosis. Gold standard diagnosis is through reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests, which aims to detect the presence of COVID-19. However, challenges with collection techniques and when in the disease lifecycle these tests are taken, can affect their reliability, highlighting a need for alternative methods of testing. Other testing methods exist, which involve testing the body’s own immune response to the presence of COVID-19, however these may also have their limitations. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effectiveness of testing the body’s own immune reaction for the presence of COVID-19. The results showed that testing the body’s immune reaction was effective, however if the person being tested is at an early stage in the disease, then it may be misdiagnosed. This study could be used by healthcare professionals to understand that the use of any type of COVID-19 testing may have its limitations, and although a person may test negative, there is still a possibility that they have the infection if symptoms exist
Abstract
BACKGROUND The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a devastating impact worldwide, and timely detection and quarantine of infected patients are critical to prevent spread of disease. Serological antibody testing is an important diagnostic method used increasingly in clinics, although its clinical application is still under investigation. METHODS A meta-analysis was conducted to compare the diagnostic performance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 antibody tests in patients with COVID-19. The test results analysed included: (1) IgM-positive but IgG-negative (IgM+IgG-); (2) IgG-positive but IgM-negative (IgG+IgM-); (3) both IgM-positive and IgG-positive (IgM+IgG+); (4) IgM-positive without IgG information (IgM+IgG+/-); (5) IgG-positive without IgM information (IgG+IgM+/-); (6) either IgM-positive or IgG-positive (IgM+ or IgG+); and (7) IgA-positive (IgA+). RESULTS Sixty-eight studies were included. Pooled sensitivities for IgM+IgG-, IgG+IgM-, IgM+IgG+, IgM+IgG+/-, IgG+IgM+/-, and IgM+ or IgG+ were 6%, 7%, 53%, 68%, 73% and 79% respectively. Pooled specificities ranged from 98% to 100%. IgA+ had a pooled sensitivity of 78% but a relatively low specificity of 88%. Tests conducted 2 weeks after symptom onset showed better diagnostic accuracy than tests conducted earlier. Chemiluminescence immunoassay and detection of S protein as the antigen could offer more accurate diagnostic results. DISCUSSION These findings support the supplemental role of serological antibody tests in the diagnosis of COVID-19. However, their capacity to diagnose COVID-19 early in the disease course could be limited.
-
9.
Case report and systematic review suggest that children may experience similar long-term effects to adults after clinical COVID-19.
Ludvigsson, JF
Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992). 2021;110(3):914-921
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
The long-term effects of COVID-19 is becoming increasingly documented in adults. Symptoms such as fatigue, headache and depression have all been reported, however data on the possible long-term effects of COVID-19 in children is scarce. The aim of this systematic review and case report was to describe the long-term effects of COVID-19 in five children and support this with other reports in the literature. The results showed that of the five case reports of long COVID, four were girls aged 9-15 years. All subjects reported symptoms lasting between 6-8 months. Most common symptoms were fatigue, difficulty breathing and heart issues. The systematic literature review did not find any publications which documented long COVID in children. It was concluded that children may experience long COVID symptoms and girls may be more susceptible. This study could be used by healthcare professionals to understand that children may also be affected by long COVID and that patients should be monitored for symptoms for at least 6-8 months.
Abstract
AIM: Persistent symptoms in adults after COVID-19 are emerging and the term long COVID is increasingly appearing in the literature. However, paediatric data are scarce. METHODS This paper contains a case report of five Swedish children and the long-term symptoms reported by their parents. It also includes a systematic literature review of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases and the medRxiv/bioRxiv pre-print servers up to 2 November 2020. RESULTS The five children with potential long COVID had a median age of 12 years (range 9-15) and four were girls. They had symptoms for 6-8 months after their clinical diagnoses of COVID-19. None were hospitalised at diagnosis, but one was later admitted for peri-myocarditis. All five children had fatigue, dyspnoea, heart palpitations or chest pain, and four had headaches, difficulties concentrating, muscle weakness, dizziness and sore throats. Some had improved after 6-8 months, but they all suffered from fatigue and none had fully returned to school. The systematic review identified 179 publications and 19 of these were deemed relevant and read in detail. None contained any information on long COVID in children. CONCLUSION Children may experience similar long COVID symptoms to adults and females may be more affected.
-
10.
Prevalence and outcomes of malnutrition among hospitalized COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Abate, SM, Chekole, YA, Estifanos, MB, Abate, KH, Kabthymer, RH
Clinical nutrition ESPEN. 2021;43:174-183
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Malnutrition during Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a ‘two-edged sword’ particularly in low-income countries where chronic malnutrition is very high. The disease is still very high, and it is relapsing to the worst in some countries. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence and outcome of malnutrition among patients with COVID-19. This study is a systemic review and meta-analysis of 14 studies with 4187 participants. Results indicate that the prevalence of malnutrition was very high among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and that mortality among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was more than 10 times more likely as compared to those who were well-nourished. Authors conclude that a mitigating strategy by different stakeholders is needed to prevent and manage malnutrition and its outcomes.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Malnutrition is inevitable in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to its effect on the gastrointestinal system, immune system, and high metabolic activity. However, the prevalence of malnutrition and its outcomes is uncertain. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and outcome of malnutrition among patients with COVID-19. METHOD A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed/Medline; Science direct and LILACS from December 29, 2019 to September, 2020 without language restriction. All observational studies reporting the prevalence of malnutrition were included while case reports and reviews were excluded. The data were extracted with two independent authors with a customized format and the disagreements were resolved by the other authors. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using a standardized critical appraisal tool. RESULTS A total of 511 articles were identified from different databases and 27 articles were selected for evaluation after the successive screening. Fourteen articles with 4187 participants were included. The pooled prevalence of malnutrition among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was 49.11% (95% CI: 31.67 to 66.54). The odd of mortality among patients COVID-19 with malnutrition was 10 times more likely as compared to those who were well-nourished. CONCLUSION The prevalence of malnutrition and mortality associated with malnutrition among COVID-19 hospitalized patients was very high which entails a mitigating strategy by different stakeholders to prevent and manage malnutrition and its outcomes. REGISTRATION This systematic review was registered in Prospero's international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42020215396).