Dataset Information

Anemia and iron metabolism in COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Iron metabolism and anemia may play an important role in multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate biomarkers of anemia and iron metabolism (hemoglobin, ferritin, transferrin, soluble transferrin receptor, hepcidin, haptoglobin, unsaturated iron-binding capacity, erythropoietin, free erythrocyte protoporphyrine, and erythrocyte indices) in patients diagnosed with COVID-19, and explored their prognostic value. Six bibliographic databases were searched up to August 3rd 2020. We included 189 unique studies, with data from 57,563 COVID-19 patients. Pooled mean hemoglobin and ferritin levels in COVID-19 patients across all ages were 129.7 g/L (95% Confidence Interval (CI), 128.51; 130.88) and 777.33 ng/mL (95% CI, 701.33; 852.77), respectively. Hemoglobin levels were lower with older age, higher percentage of subjects with diabetes, hypertension and overall comorbidities, and admitted to intensive care. Ferritin level increased with older age, increasing proportion of hypertensive study participants, and increasing proportion of mortality. Compared to moderate cases, severe COVID-19 cases had lower hemoglobin [weighted mean difference (WMD),?-?4.08 g/L (95% CI?-?5.12;?-?3.05)] and red blood cell count [WMD,?-?0.16?×?1012 /L (95% CI?-?0.31;?-?0.014)], and higher ferritin [WMD,?-?473.25 ng/mL (95% CI 382.52; 563.98)] and red cell distribution width [WMD, 1.82% (95% CI 0.10; 3.55)]. A significant difference in mean ferritin levels of 606.37 ng/mL (95% CI 461.86; 750.88) was found between survivors and non-survivors, but not in hemoglobin levels. Future studies should explore the impact of iron metabolism and anemia in the pathophysiology, prognosis, and treatment of COVID-19.

SUBMITTER: Taneri PE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7438401 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Anemia and iron metabolism in COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Taneri Petek Eylul PE Gómez-Ochoa Sergio Alejandro SA Llanaj Erand E Raguindin Peter Francis PF Rojas Lyda Z LZ Roa-Díaz Zayne Milena ZM Salvador Dante D Groothof Dion D Minder Beatrice B Kopp-Heim Doris D Hautz Wolf E WE Eisenga Michele F MF Franco Oscar H OH Glisic Marija M Muka Taulant T

European journal of epidemiology 20200820 8

Iron metabolism and anemia may play an important role in multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate biomarkers of anemia and iron metabolism (hemoglobin, ferritin, transferrin, soluble transferrin receptor, hepcidin, haptoglobin, unsaturated iron-binding capacity, erythropoietin, free erythrocyte protoporphyrine, and erythrocyte indices) in patients diagnosed with COVID-19, and explored their prognost ...[more]

PMID: 32816244

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo perform a systematic review of randomized trials comparing oral vs intravenous (IV) iron therapy to treat postpartum anemia.Data sourcesData sources were as follows: PubMed (1972-2017); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL (1972-2017); CINAHL (1972-2017); Web of Science; Excerpta Medica Database, and EMBASE (1972-2017).Study eligibility criteriaWe included randomized trials comparing oral vs IV iron monotherapy to treat postpartum anemia (classified as a hemoglobin <12 g/dL).Study appraisal and synthesis methodsStudy quality was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. The primary outcome was hemoglobin concentration at 6 weeks postpartum. Secondary outcomes included hemoglobin concentration at 1-5 weeks postpartum, ferritin concentration at 1-6 weeks postpartum, and maternal adverse outcomes. For meta-analysis, mean differences and odds ratios using a random effects model were calculated. Risk of heterogeneity was reported as I2.ResultsA total of 15 randomized trials met our inclusion criteria (n = 1001 and 1 181 women receiving oral iron and IV iron, respectively); 4 studies reported data for our primary outcome. We observed higher postpartum week 6 hemoglobin concentrations in the IV iron group compared to the oral iron group (mean difference, 0.9 g/dL; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.4-1.3; P = .0003). Compared to oral iron, women receiving IV iron had higher hemoglobin concentrations at postpartum weeks 1, 2, and 3; higher ferritin concentrations at postpartum weeks 1, 2, 4, and 6; an increased likelihood of skin flushing (odds ratio [OR], 6.95; 95% CI, 1.56-31.03; P = .01; I2 = 0%); and a decreased likelihood of constipation (OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.03-0.21; P < .00001, I2 = 27%) and dyspepsia (OR, 0.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.42; P = .004; I2 = 0%). The reported event rate for anaphylaxis among women receiving IV iron was 0.6%.ConclusionIn this systematic review, among women with postpartum anemia, hemoglobin concentrations at 6 weeks postpartum were almost 1 g/dL higher in women who received IV iron compared to oral iron. The safety profile of IV iron was also reassuring. Given the weaker hemoglobin response and higher risk of gastrointestinal side effects with oral iron use, our findings suggest that IV iron be considered as a viable treatment option for postpartum iron deficiency anemia.

Project description:BackgroundIntravenous iron (IV-iron) is used as an alternative to, or alongside, red blood cell transfusion (RBC-T) to treat more severe postpartum anemia (PPA), although optimal treatment options remain unclear. No previous systematic reviews have examined IV-iron and RBC-T, including patient-reported outcomes and hematological responses.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing IV-iron and RBC-T with each other, oral iron, no treatment, and placebo for the treatment of PPA. Key inclusion criteria were PPA (hemoglobin < 12 g/dL) and IV-iron or RBC-T as interventions. Key exclusion criteria were antenatal IV-iron or RBC-T. Fatigue was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included hemoglobin and ferritin concentrations, and adverse events. From 27th August 2020 to 26th September 2022, databases, registries, and hand searches identified studies. A fixed-effect meta-analysis was undertaken using RevMan (5.4) software. The quality of the studies and the evidence was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias table, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. This review is registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42020201115).ResultsTwenty studies and 4196 participants were included: 1834 assigned IV-iron, 1771 assigned oral iron, 330 assigned RBC-T, and 261 assigned non-intervention. Six studies reported the primary outcome of fatigue (1251 participants). Only studies of IV-iron vs. oral iron (15 studies) were available for meta-analysis. Of these, three reported on fatigue using different scales; two were available for meta-analysis. There was a significant reduction in fatigue with IV-iron compared to oral iron (standardized mean difference - 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 0.62, - 0.18, I2 = 0%). The direction of effect also favored IV-iron for hemoglobin (mean difference (MD) 0.54 g/dL, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47, 0.61, I2 = 91%), ferritin, (MD 58.07 mcg/L, 95% CI 55.74, 60.41, I2 = 99%), and total adverse events (risk-ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.52, 0.77, I2 = 84%). The overall quality of the evidence was low-moderate.DiscussionFor all outcomes, the evidence for RBC-T, compared to IV-iron, non-intervention, or dose effects of RBC-T is very limited. Further research is needed to determine whether RBC-T or IV-iron for the treatment of PPA is superior for fatigue and hematological outcomes.

Project description:Double-fortified salt (DFS) containing iron and iodine has been proposed as a feasible and cost-effective alternative for iron fortification in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis from randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials to 1) assess the effect of DFS on biomarkers of iron status and the risk of anemia and iron deficiency anemia (IDA) and 2) evaluate differential effects of DFS by study type (efficacy or effectiveness), population subgroups, iron formulation (ferrous sulfate, ferrous fumarate, and ferric pyrophosphate), iron concentration, duration of intervention, and study quality. A systematic search with the use of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, and other sources identified 221 articles. Twelve efficacy and 2 effectiveness studies met prespecified inclusion criteria. All studies were conducted in LMICs: 10 in India, 2 in Morocco, and 1 each in Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana. In efficacy studies, DFS increased hemoglobin concentrations [standardized mean difference (SMD): 0.28; 95% CI: 0.11, 0.44; P < 0.001] and reduced the risk of anemia (RR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.46, 0.77; P < 0.001) and IDA (RR 0.37; 95% CI: 0.25, 0.54; P < 0.001). In effectiveness studies, the effect size for hemoglobin was smaller but significant (SMD: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.05; P < 0.01). Stratified analyses of efficacy studies by population subgroups indicated positive effects of DFS among women and school-age children. For the latter, DFS increased hemoglobin concentrations (SMD: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.60; P < 0.05) and reduced the risk of anemia (SMD: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.34, 0.67; P < 0.001) and IDA (SMD: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.25, 0.54; P < 0.001). Hemoglobin concentrations, anemia prevalence and deworming at baseline, sample size, and study duration were not associated with effect sizes. The results indicate that DFS is efficacious in increasing hemoglobin concentrations and reducing the risk of anemia and IDA in LMIC populations. More effectiveness studies are needed.

Project description:BackgroundIron deficiency anemia (IDA) is among the most common micronutrient deficiencies in women of childbearing age and may affect children's development. Brazil has several national programs to tackle this condition, such as food fortification and supplementation for pregnant women, but IDA prevalence in this population has not been systematically reviewed. We sought to determine the prevalence of IDA in Brazilian women of childbearing age through a systematic review with metanalysis.MethodologyA protocol was previously published on the PROSPERO platform under the code CRD42020200960. A panel of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) approved the protocol of this study under the public call number 26/2019. The main databases searched were MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Lilacs, and SciELO. In gray literature, the Brazilian Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations and the annals of the Brazilian Congress of Epidemiology and the Brazilian Congress of Public Health were accessed. The search strategy involved terms related to the condition (IDA) and the age group of the population of interest (teenagers and adults). Studies that had assessed the prevalence of IDA in Brazilian women of childbearing age (10-49 years) were included. Three independent reviewers read all titles and abstracts and extracted data from the included studies. Random effects meta-analyses using the Freeman-Tukey arcsine transformation were carried out with prevalence data, and meta-regression was conducted to test for subgroup differences. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.ResultsFrom 21,210 unique records screened, 237 full-texts were retrieved, of which 91 were included in the qualitative synthesis, and 83 were included in the meta-analysis. The overall IDA prevalence was 25% (95% CI [23-28], 83 studies). The subgroup of studies that used random sampling showed a prevalence of 22% (95% CI [17-27], 22 studies), whereas in those with non-random sampling, the prevalence was 27% (95% CI [23-30], 61 studies), without significant differences between subgroups in the metaregression (P = 0.13). High prevalence of IDA were found in the subgroups of studies conducted in the North and Northeast regions (30%; 95% CI [24-37]; seven studies, and 30%; 95% CI [26-34]; 27 studies, respectively), in studies conducted with indigenous population (53%; 95% CI [27-78], four studies), and with studies that had their collections after 2015 (28%; 95% CI [23-34], nine studies).ConclusionsIDA in women of childbearing age remains a public health problem in Brazil, especially in the North and Northeast region. The national programs should be strengthened and more thoroughly supervised to decrease this condition nationally.

Project description:Background: Due to lack of preparedness of health systems, fast spread of the new virus, high mortality rates, and lack of a definite treatment, the outbreak of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) led to high levels of fear and anxiety in different populations. In addition, isolation, mental disorders, and limitations in social interactions as a result of lockdown and travel ban increased the fear of the new coronavirus. Methods: International databases, including Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google scholar, were searched without any time limitation, and all observational studies published in English reporting the mean of fear of COVID-19 based on the Fear of COVID-19 scale (FCV-19S) were included in the analysis. Methodological quality was assessed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. Random effects model, subgroup analysis, and meta-regression analysis were used to analyze the data. Heterogeneity across studies was examined using Cochran's Q test and I 2 statistic. All the statistical analyses were conducted using R software v4.0.3. Results: A total of 44 articles with a sample size of 52,462 were reviewed. A pooled mean of 18.57 was found for fear of COVID-19. The mean of fear of COVID-19 was higher in women than in men (20.67 vs. 18.21). The highest and lowest means of fear of COVID-19 had been found in Asia (18.36) and Australia (17.43) based on continent, and in hospital staff (19.51) and college students (17.95) based on target population, respectively. In addition, the highest and lowest means of fear of COVID-19 were related to items #1 and #3 of the scale, respectively. According to the results of meta-regression analysis, there was no significant association between the mean of fear of COVID-19 and sample size and participants' age. In addition, publication error was not significant (P = 0.721). Conclusion: The mean of fear of COVID-19 was high around the world; therefore, it seems necessary to pay more attention to the negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health.

Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic, affecting millions of people. However, the relationship between COVID-19 and acute cerebrovascular diseases is unclear.AimsWe aimed to characterize the incidence, risk factors, clinical-radiological manifestations, and outcome of COVID-19-associated stroke.MethodsThree medical databases were systematically reviewed for published articles on acute cerebrovascular diseases in COVID-19 (December 2019-September 2020). The review protocol was previously registered (PROSPERO ID = CRD42020185476). Data were extracted from articles reporting ≥5 stroke cases in COVID-19. We complied with the PRISMA guidelines and used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess data quality. Data were pooled using a random-effect model.Summary of reviewOf 2277 initially identified articles, 61 (2.7%) were entered in the meta-analysis. Out of 108,571 patients with COVID-19, acute CVD occurred in 1.4% (95%CI: 1.0-1.9). The most common manifestation was acute ischemic stroke (87.4%); intracerebral hemorrhage was less common (11.6%). Patients with COVID-19 developing acute cerebrovascular diseases, compared to those who did not, were older (pooled median difference = 4.8 years; 95%CI: 1.7-22.4), more likely to have hypertension (OR = 7.35; 95%CI: 1.94-27.87), diabetes mellitus (OR = 5.56; 95%CI: 3.34-9.24), coronary artery disease (OR = 3.12; 95%CI: 1.61-6.02), and severe infection (OR = 5.10; 95%CI: 2.72-9.54). Compared to individuals who experienced a stroke without the infection, patients with COVID-19 and stroke were younger (pooled median difference = -6.0 years; 95%CI: -12.3 to -1.4), had higher NIHSS (pooled median difference = 5; 95%CI: 3-9), higher frequency of large vessel occlusion (OR = 2.73; 95%CI: 1.63-4.57), and higher in-hospital mortality rate (OR = 5.21; 95%CI: 3.43-7.90).ConclusionsAcute cerebrovascular diseases are not uncommon in patients with COVID-19, especially in those whom are severely infected and have pre-existing vascular risk factors. The pattern of large vessel occlusion and multi-territory infarcts suggests that cerebral thrombosis and/or thromboembolism could be possible causative pathways for the disease.

Dataset Information

Anemia and iron metabolism in COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Anemia and iron metabolism in COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets