COVID-19 fatality rates in hospitalized patients: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by a newly discovered coronavirus. Although general and local public health report deathly cases, case fatality rates are still largely unknown. Thus, we sought to evaluate the mortality of COVID-19.Methods
We searched PubMed and EMBASE databases for articles evaluating the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 patients that included clinical outcomes, between December 2020 and 24 April 2020. Two authors performed an independent selection using predefined terms of search.Results
We retrieved 33 studies with a total of 13,398 patients with COVID-19 diagnosis. The mortality rate of the COVID-19 patients was 17.1% (95% CI 12.7; 22.7, I2 = 96.9%). For general patients admitted to the hospital (excluding critical care-only studies) the mortality rate of the COVID-19 was 11.5% (95% CI 7.7; 16.9, I2 = 96.7%). Among critical illness studies (n = 7) we found a 40.5% mortality (95% CI 31.2; 50.6, I2 = 91.8%).Conclusion
High COVID-19 mortality among general admitted patients and critical care cases should guide resources allocations and economic burden calculations during the pandemics.
SUBMITTER: Macedo A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7920817 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:An important unknown during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been the infection fatality rate (IFR). This differs from the case fatality rate (CFR) as an estimate of the number of deaths and as a proportion of the total number of cases, including those who are mild and asymptomatic. While the CFR is extremely valuable for experts, IFR is increasingly being called for by policy makers and the lay public as an estimate of the overall mortality from COVID-19.MethodsPubmed, Medline, SSRN, and Medrxiv were searched using a set of terms and Boolean operators on 25/04/2020 and re-searched on 14/05/2020, 21/05/2020 and 16/06/2020. Articles were screened for inclusion by both authors. Meta-analysis was performed in Stata 15.1 by using the metan command, based on IFR and confidence intervals extracted from each study. Google/Google Scholar was used to assess the grey literature relating to government reports.ResultsAfter exclusions, there were 24 estimates of IFR included in the final meta-analysis, from a wide range of countries, published between February and June 2020. The meta-analysis demonstrated a point estimate of IFR of 0.68% (0.53%-0.82%) with high heterogeneity (p < 0.001).ConclusionBased on a systematic review and meta-analysis of published evidence on COVID-19 until July 2020, the IFR of the disease across populations is 0.68% (0.53%-0.82%). However, due to very high heterogeneity in the meta-analysis, it is difficult to know if this represents a completely unbiased point estimate. It is likely that, due to age and perhaps underlying comorbidities in the population, different places will experience different IFRs due to the disease. Given issues with mortality recording, it is also likely that this represents an underestimate of the true IFR figure. More research looking at age-stratified IFR is urgently needed to inform policymaking on this front.
| S-EPMC7524446 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the association of COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion with mortality and the differences between subgroups in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.Patients and methodsOn October 26, 2022, a systematic search was performed for clinical studies of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in the literature from January 1, 2020, to October 26, 2022. Randomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies investigating COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion compared with standard of care treatment or placebo among hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 were included. The electronic search yielded 3841 unique records, of which 744 were considered for full-text screening. The selection process was performed independently by a panel of 5 reviewers. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data were extracted by 5 independent reviewers in duplicate and pooled using an inverse-variance random effects model. The prespecified end point was all-cause mortality during hospitalization.ResultsThirty-nine randomized clinical trials enrolling 21,529 participants and 70 matched cohort studies enrolling 50,160 participants were included in the systematic review. Separate meta-analyses reported that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the control cohort for both randomized clinical trials (odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-1.00) and matched cohort studies (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.88). The meta-analysis of subgroups revealed 2 important findings. First, treatment with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with convalescent plasma containing low antibody levels (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.99). Second, earlier treatment with COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the later treatment cohort (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.82).ConclusionDuring COVID-19 convalescent plasma use was associated with a 13% reduced risk of mortality, implying a mortality benefit for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, particularly those treated with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels treated earlier in the disease course.
| S-EPMC10582279 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Determine age-specific infection fatality rates for COVID-19 to inform public health policies and communications that help protect vulnerable age groups. Studies of COVID-19 prevalence were collected by conducting an online search of published articles, preprints, and government reports that were publicly disseminated prior to 18 September 2020. The systematic review encompassed 113 studies, of which 27 studies (covering 34 geographical locations) satisfied the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Age-specific IFRs were computed using the prevalence data in conjunction with reported fatalities 4 weeks after the midpoint date of the study, reflecting typical lags in fatalities and reporting. Meta-regression procedures in Stata were used to analyze the infection fatality rate (IFR) by age. Our analysis finds a exponential relationship between age and IFR for COVID-19. The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25) but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85. Moreover, our results indicate that about 90% of the variation in population IFR across geographical locations reflects differences in the age composition of the population and the extent to which relatively vulnerable age groups were exposed to the virus. These results indicate that COVID-19 is hazardous not only for the elderly but also for middle-aged adults, for whom the infection fatality rate is two orders of magnitude greater than the annualized risk of a fatal automobile accident and far more dangerous than seasonal influenza. Moreover, the overall IFR for COVID-19 should not be viewed as a fixed parameter but as intrinsically linked to the age-specific pattern of infections. Consequently, public health measures to mitigate infections in older adults could substantially decrease total deaths.
| S-EPMC7721859 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about the occurrence of bloodstream infections in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and the related clinical consequences. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to estimate the pooled occurrence of BSIs among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and mortality of this patient population.MethodsA systematic search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science from inception to 19 April 2021. The primary outcome was the occurrence of BSIs among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The secondary outcome was mortality at the longest available follow-up.ResultsForty-six studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 42,694 patients evaluated. The estimated occurrence of BSIs was 7.3% (95% CI 4.7-1.1%) among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 41% (95% CI 30%-52.8%). The subgroup analysis conducted on patients admitted to ICU provided an estimated occurrence of 29.6% (95% CI 21.7%-38.8%). A higher occurrence of BSI was observed in patients with COVID-19, in comparison with patients without COVID-19 (OR 2.77; 95% CI 1.53-5.02; p < 0.001).ConclusionsOur analysis estimated the occurrence of BSIs among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at around 7%. A four-times higher occurrence was estimated among patients admitted to ICU.
| S-EPMC8540195 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mortality rates of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) continue to rise across the world. Information regarding the predictors of mortality in patients with COVID-19 remains scarce. Herein, we performed a systematic review of published articles, from 1 January to 24 April 2020, to evaluate the risk factors associated with mortality in COVID-19. Two investigators independently searched the articles and collected the data, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We looked for associations between mortality and patient characteristics, comorbidities, and laboratory abnormalities. A total of 14 studies documenting the outcomes of 4659 patients were included. The presence of comorbidities such as hypertension (odds ratio [OR], 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-3.1; P < .00001), coronary heart disease (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 2.1-6.9; P < .00001), and diabetes (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.7-2.3; P < .00001) were associated with significantly higher risk of death amongst patients with COVID-19. Those who died, compared with those who survived, differed on multiple biomarkers on admission including elevated levels of cardiac troponin (+44.2 ng/L, 95% CI, 19.0-69.4; P = .0006); C-reactive protein (+66.3 µg/mL, 95% CI, 46.7-85.9; P < .00001); interleukin-6 (+4.6 ng/mL, 95% CI, 3.6-5.6; P < .00001); D-dimer (+4.6 µg/mL, 95% CI, 2.8-6.4; P < .00001); creatinine (+15.3 µmol/L, 95% CI, 6.2-24.3; P = .001); and alanine transaminase (+5.7 U/L, 95% CI, 2.6-8.8; P = .0003); as well as decreased levels of albumin (-3.7 g/L, 95% CI, -5.3 to -2.1; P < .00001). Individuals with underlying cardiometabolic disease and that present with evidence for acute inflammation and end-organ damage are at higher risk of mortality due to COVID-19 infection and should be managed with greater intensity.
| S-EPMC7280666 | biostudies-literature
Project description:(1) Background: Studies have reported that COVID-19 may increase the risk of malnutrition among patients. However, the prevalence of such risk in hospitalized COVID-19 patients is uncertain due to the inconsistent use of assessment methods. (2) Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched to identify studies on the nutritional status of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. A pooled prevalence of malnutrition risk evaluated by Nutrition Risk Score (NRS-2002) was obtained using a random effects model. Differences by study-level characteristics were examined by hospitalization setting, time of assessment, age, and country. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle−Ottawa Scale. (3) Results: 53 studies from 17 countries were identified and summarized. A total of 17 studies using NRS-2002, including 3614 COVID-19 patients were included in the primary meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of risk of malnutrition was significantly higher among ICU patients (92.2%, 95% CI: 85.9% to 96.8%) than among general ward patients (70.7%, 95% CI: 56.4% to 83.2%) (p = 0.002). No significant differences were found between age groups (≥65 vs. <65 years, p = 0.306) and countries (p = 0.893). (4) Conclusions: High risk of malnutrition is common and concerning in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, suggesting that malnutrition screening and nutritional support during hospitalization are needed.
| S-EPMC9780808 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rationale: Initial reports of case fatality rates (CFRs) among adults with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) are highly variable.Objectives: To examine the CFR of patients with COVID-19 receiving IMV.Methods: Two authors independently searched PubMed, Embase, medRxiv, bioRxiv, the COVID-19 living systematic review, and national registry databases. The primary outcome was the "reported CFR" for patients with confirmed COVID-19 requiring IMV. "Definitive hospital CFR" for patients with outcomes at hospital discharge was also investigated. Finally, CFR was analyzed by patient age, geographic region, and study quality on the basis of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.Measurements and Results: Sixty-nine studies were included, describing 57,420 adult patients with COVID-19 who received IMV. Overall reported CFR was estimated as 45% (95% confidence interval [CI], 39-52%). Fifty-four of 69 studies stated whether hospital outcomes were available but provided a definitive hospital outcome on only 13,120 (22.8%) of the total IMV patient population. Among studies in which age-stratified CFR was available, pooled CFR estimates ranged from 47.9% (95% CI, 46.4-49.4%) in younger patients (age ≤40 yr) to 84.4% (95% CI, 83.3-85.4%) in older patients (age >80 yr). CFR was also higher in early COVID-19 epicenters. Overall heterogeneity is high (I2 >90%), with nonsignificant Egger's regression test suggesting no publication bias.Conclusions: Almost half of patients with COVID-19 receiving IMV died based on the reported CFR, but variable CFR reporting methods resulted in a wide range of CFRs between studies. The reported CFR was higher in older patients and in early pandemic epicenters, which may be influenced by limited ICU resources. Reporting of definitive outcomes on all patients would facilitate comparisons between studies.Systematic review registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020186997).
| S-EPMC7781141 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction and objectivesThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been a challenge globally. In severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic 60% of patients had hepatic injury, due to phylogenetic similarities of the viruses it is assumed that COVID-19 is associated with acute liver injury. In this meta-analysis, we aim to study the occurrence and association of liver injury, comorbid liver disease and elevated liver enzymes in COVID-19 confirmed hospitalizations with outcomes.Materials and methodsData from observational studies describing comorbid chronic liver disease, acute liver injury, elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels and outcomes of COVID-19 hospitalized patients from December 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020 was extracted following PRISMA guidelines. Adverse outcomes were defined as admission to intensive care unit (ICU), oxygen saturation <90%, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), severe disease and in-hospital mortality. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were obtained.Results24 studies with 12,882 confirmed COVID-19 patients were included. Overall prevalence of CM-CLD was 2.6%, COVID-19-ALI was 26.5%, elevated AST was 41.1% and elevated ALT was 29.1%. CM-CLD had no significant association with poor outcomes (pooled OR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.71-1.29; p=0.78). COVID-19-ALI (1.68;1.04-2.70; p=0.03), elevated AST (2.98; 2.35-3.77; p<0.00001) and elevated ALT (1.85;1.49-2.29; p<0.00001) were significantly associated with higher odds of poor outcomes.ConclusionOur meta-analysis suggests that acute liver injury and elevated liver enzymes were significantly associated with COVID-19 severity. Future studies should evaluate changing levels of biomarkers amongst liver disease patients to predict poor outcomes of COVID-19 and causes of liver injury during COVID-19 infection.
| S-EPMC7566821 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionFamotidine is a competitive histamine H2-receptor antagonist most commonly used for gastric acid suppression but thought to have potential efficacy in treating patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis are to summarize the current literature and report clinical outcomes on the use of famotidine for treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19.MethodsFive databases were searched through February 12, 2021 to identify observational studies that reported on associations of famotidine use with outcomes in COVID-19. Meta-analysis was conducted for composite primary clinical outcome (e.g. rate of death, intubation, or intensive care unit admissions) and death separately, where either aggregate odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) was calculated.ResultsFour studies, reporting on 46,435 total patients and 3,110 patients treated with famotidine, were included in this meta-analysis. There was no significant association between famotidine use and composite outcomes in patients with COVID-19: HR 0.63 (95% CI: 0.35, 1.16). Across the three studies that reported mortality separated from other endpoints, there was no association between famotidine use during hospitalization and risk of death-HR 0.67 (95% CI: 0.26, 1.73) and OR 0.79 (95% CI: 0.19, 3.34). Heterogeneity ranged from 83.69% to 88.07%.ConclusionBased on the existing observational studies, famotidine use is not associated with a reduced risk of mortality or combined outcome of mortality, intubation, and/or intensive care services in hospitalized individuals with COVID-19, though heterogeneity was high, and point estimates suggested a possible protective effect for the composite outcome that may not have been observed due to lack of power. Further randomized controlled trials (RCTs) may help determine the efficacy and safety of famotidine as a treatment for COVID-19 patients in various care settings of the disease.
| S-EPMC8568101 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe majority of studies evaluating the effect of myocardial injury on the survival of COVID-19 patients have been performed outside of the United States (U.S.). These studies have often utilized definitions of myocardial injury that are not guideline-based and thus, not applicable to the U.S.Patient populationMethodsThe current study is a two-part investigation of the effect of myocardial injury on the clinical outcome of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The first part is a retrospective analysis of 268 patients admitted to our healthcare system in Toledo, Ohio, U.S.; the second part is a systematic review and meta-analysis of all similar studies performed within the U.S.ResultsIn our retrospective analysis, patients with myocardial injury were older (mean age 73 vs. 59 years, P 0.001), more likely to have hypertension (86% vs. 67%, P 0.005), underlying cardiovascular disease (57% vs. 24%, P 0.001), and chronic kidney disease (26% vs. 10%, P 0.004). Myocardial injury was also associated with a lower likelihood of discharge to home (35% vs. 69%, P 0.001), and a higher likelihood of death (33% vs. 10%, P 0.001), acute kidney injury (74% vs. 30%, P 0.001), and circulatory shock (33% vs. 12%, P 0.001). Our meta-analysis included 12,577 patients from 8 U.S. states and 55 hospitals who were hospitalized with COVID-19, with the finding that myocardial injury was significantly associated with increased mortality (HR 2.43, CI 2.28-3.6, P 0.0005). The prevalence of myocardial injury ranged from 9.2 to 51%, with a mean prevalence of 27.2%.ConclusionHospitalized COVID-19 patients in the U.S. have a high prevalence of myocardial injury, which was associated with poorer survival and outcomes.
| S-EPMC8719604 | biostudies-literature