COPD and the risk of poor outcomes in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are highly susceptible from respiratory exacerbations from viral respiratory tract infections. However, it is unclear whether they are at increased risk of COVID-19 pneumonia or COVID-19-related mortality. We aimed to determine whether COPD is a risk factor for adverse COVID-19 outcomes including hospitalization, severe COVID-19, or death.Methods
Following the PRISMA guidelines, we performed a systematic review of COVID-19 clinical studies published between November 1st, 2019 and January 28th, 2021 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42020191491). We included studies that quantified the number of COPD patients, and reported at least one of the following outcomes stratified by COPD status: hospitalization; severe COVID-19; ICU admission; mechanical ventilation; acute respiratory distress syndrome; or mortality. We meta-analyzed the results of individual studies to determine the odds ratio (OR) of these outcomes in patients with COPD compared to those without COPD.Findings
Fifty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria, and underwent data extraction. Most studies were retrospective cohort studies/case series of hospitalized patients. Only four studies examined the effects of COPD on COVID-19 outcomes as their primary endpoint. In aggregate, COPD was associated with increased odds of hospitalization (OR 4.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.65-4.90), ICU admission (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.02-1.78), and mortality (OR 2.47, 95% CI 2.18-2.79).Interpretation
Having a clinical diagnosis of COPD significantly increases the odds of poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. COPD patients should thus be considered a high-risk group, and targeted for preventative measures and aggressive treatment for COVID-19 including vaccination.
SUBMITTER: Gerayeli FV
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7971471 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding the risk factors for poor outcomes among COVID-19 patients could help identify vulnerable populations who would need prioritisation in prevention and treatment for COVID-19. We aimed to critically appraise and synthesise published evidence on the risk factors for poor outcomes in hospitalised COVID-19 patients.MethodsWe searched PubMed, medRxiv and the WHO COVID-19 literature database for studies that reported characteristics of COVID-19 patients who required hospitalisation. We included studies published between January and May 2020 that reported adjusted effect size of any demographic and/or clinical factors for any of the three poor outcomes: mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and invasive mechanical ventilation. We appraised the quality of the included studies using Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tools and quantitatively synthesised the evidence through a series of random-effect meta-analyses. To aid data interpretation, we further developed an interpretation framework that indicated strength of the evidence, informed by both quantity and quality of the evidence.ResultsWe included a total of 40 studies in our review. Most of the included studies (29/40, 73%) were assessed as "good quality", with assessment scores of 80 or more. We found that male sex (pooled odds ratio (OR) = 1.32 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.18-1.48; 20 studies), older age (OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 1.04-1.07, per one year of age increase; 10 studies), obesity (OR = 1.59, 95% CI = 1.02-2.48; 4 studies), diabetes (OR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.11-1.40; 11 studies) and chronic kidney diseases (6 studies; OR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.27-1.93) were associated with increased risks for mortality with the greatest strength of evidence based on our interpretation framework. We did not find increased risk of mortality for several factors including chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (5 studies), cancer (4 studies), or current smoker (5 studies); however, this does not indicate absence of risk due to limited data on each of these factors.ConclusionMale sex, older age, obesity, diabetes and chronic kidney diseases are important risk factors of COVID-19 poor outcomes. Our review provides not only an appraisal and synthesis of evidence on the risk factors of COVID-19 poor outcomes, but also a data interpretation framework that could be adopted by relevant future research.
| S-EPMC7980087 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsCoronavirus disease (COVID-19) still becomes a global burden that affected people in different groups. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between thyroid disease and the outcome of COVID-19 patients.MethodThis was a meta-analysis study from articles obtained through a systematic literature search to investigate the relationship between thyroid disease and COVID-19 outcomes. Composite poor outcomes comprised of severity, mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and hospitalization.ResultsA total of 31339 patients from 21 studies included in this study. Thyroid disorder was associated with increased composite poor outcome (risk ratio (RR) 1.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.53, 2.27], p < 0.001; I2 = 84%, p < 0.01), this included higher disease severity (RR 1.92 [1.40, 2.63], p < 0.05; I2 = 86%, p < 0.01), ICU admission (RR 1.61 [1.12, 2.32], p > 0.05; I2 = 32%, p < 0.05), mortality (RR 2.43 [1.44, 4.13], p < 0.05; I2 = 83%, p < 0.01), and hospitalization (RR 1.28 [1.17, 1.39], p < 0.05; I2 = 0%, p < 0.96). Meta-regression analysis indicated that age (p = 0.002) was a significant influence that affects the association. Also, the presence of unspecified thyroid disease (RR 1.91 [1.38, 2.65], p < 0.05; I2 = 81%, p < 0.01) and hypothyroidism (RR 1.90 [1.45, 2.55], p < 0.05; I2 = 85%, p < 0.01) during admission were associated with poor outcomes.ConclusionThyroid abnormalities increased the risk of COVID-19 composite poor outcomes and were influenced by the patient's age. Abnormal thyroid and hypothyroidism, but not hyperthyroidism, were associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes.
| S-EPMC8530797 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundReports have suggested a reduction in exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, particularly hospital admissions for severe exacerbations. However, the magnitude of this reduction varies between studies.MethodElectronic databases were searched from January 2020 to May 2021. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts and, when necessary, full text to determine if studies met inclusion criteria. A modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess study quality. A narrative summary of eligible studies was synthesised, and meta-analysis was conducted using a random effect model to pool the rate ratio and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for hospital admissions. Exacerbation reduction was compared against the COVID-19 Containment and Health Index.ResultsA total of 13 of 745 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review, with data from nine countries. Nine studies could be included in the meta-analysis. The pooled rate ratio of hospital admissions for COPD exacerbations during the pandemic period was 0.50 (95% CI 0.44-0.57). Findings on the rate of community-treated exacerbations were inconclusive. Three studies reported a significant decrease in the incidence of respiratory viral infections compared with the pre-pandemic period. There was not a significant relationship between exacerbation reduction and the COVID-19 Containment and Health Index (rho = 0.20, p = 0.53).ConclusionThere was a 50% reduction in admissions for COPD exacerbations during the COVID-19 pandemic period compared to pre-pandemic times, likely associated with a reduction in respiratory viral infections that trigger exacerbations. Future guidelines should consider including recommendations on respiratory virus infection control measures to reduce the burden of COPD exacerbations beyond the pandemic period.
| S-EPMC8330941 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesFatigue is a pervasive clinical symptom in coronaviruses and may continue beyond the acute phase, lasting for several months or years. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to incorporate the current evidence for postinfection fatigue among survivors of SARS-CoV-2 and investigate associated factors.MethodsEmbase, PsyINFO, Medline, CINAHL, CDSR, Open Grey, BioRxiv and MedRxiv were systematically searched from January 2019 to December 2021. Eligible records included all study designs in English. Outcomes were fatigue or vitality in adults with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 measured at >30 days post infection. Non-confirmed cases were excluded. JBI risk of bias was assessed by three reviewers. Random effects model was used for the pooled proportion with 95% CIs. A mixed effects meta-regression of 35 prospective articles calculated change in fatigue overtime. Subgroup analyses explored specific group characteristics of study methodology. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q and I2 statistic. Egger's tests for publication bias.ResultsDatabase searches returned 14 262 records. Following deduplication and screening, 178 records were identified. 147 (n=48 466 participants) were included for the meta-analyses. Pooled prevalence was 41% (95% CI: 37% to 45%, k=147, I2=98%). Fatigue significantly reduced over time (-0.057, 95% CI: -107 to -0.008, k=35, I2=99.3%, p=0.05). A higher proportion of fatigue was found in studies using a valid scale (51%, 95% CI: 43% to 58%, k=36, I2=96.2%, p=0.004). No significant difference was found for fatigue by study design (p=0.272). Egger's test indicated publication bias for all analyses except valid scales. Quality assessments indicated 4% at low risk of bias, 78% at moderate risk and 18% at high risk. Frequently reported associations were female gender, age, physical functioning, breathlessness and psychological distress.ConclusionThis study revealed that a significant proportion of survivors experienced fatigue following SARS-CoV-2 and their fatigue reduced overtime. Non-modifiable factors and psychological morbidity may contribute to ongoing fatigue and impede recovery.Prospero registration numberCRD42020201247.
| S-EPMC10151247 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study provides the first systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the predictors of unfavorable prognosis of COVID-19 in children and adolescents.MethodsWe searched literature databases until July 2021 for studies that investigated risk factors for unfavorable prognosis of children and adolescents with COVID-19. We used random-effects models to estimate the effect size with 95% confidence interval (CI).FindingsWe identified 56 studies comprising 79,104 individuals. Mortality was higher in patients with multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) (odds ratio [OR]=58.00, 95% CI 6.39-526.79) and who were admitted to intensive care (OR=12.64, 95% CI 3.42-46.68). Acute respiratry distress syndrme (ARDS) (OR=29.54, 95% CI 12.69-68.78) and acute kidney injury (AKI) (OR=55.02, 95% CI 6.26-483.35) increased the odds to be admitted to intensive care; shortness of breath (OR=16.96, 95% CI 7.66-37.51) increased the need of respiratory support; and neurological diseases (OR=5.16, 95% CI 2.30-11.60), C-reactive protein (CRP) level ≥80 mg/L (OR=11.70, 95% CI 4.37-31.37) and D-dimer level ≥0.5ug/mL (OR=20.40, 95% CI 1.76-236.44) increased the odds of progression to severe or critical disease.InterpretationCongenital heart disease, chronic pulmonary disease, neurological diseases, obesity, MIS-C, shortness of breath, ARDS, AKI, gastrointestinal symptoms, elevated CRP and D-dimer are associated with unfavourable prognosis in children and adolescents with COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8523335 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCOVID-19 has major effects on the clinical, humanistic and economic outcomes among patients, producing severe symptoms and death. Smoking has been reported as one of the factors that increases severity and mortality rate among COVID-19 patients. However, the effect of smoking on such medical outcomes is still controversial. This study conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis (SR/MA) on the association between smoking and negative outcomes among COVID-19 patients.MethodsElectronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Google Scholar, were systematically searched from the initiation of the database until 12 December 2020. All relevant studies about smoking and COVID-19 were screened using a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological quality of eligible articles. Random meta-analyses were conducted to estimate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval (CIs). Publication bias was assessed using the funnel plot, Begg's test and Egger's test.ResultsA total of 1248 studies were retrieved and reviewed. A total of 40 studies were finally included for meta-analysis. Both current smoking and former smoking significantly increase the risk of disease severity (OR=1.58; 95% CI: 1.16-2.15, p=0.004; and OR=2.48; 95% CI: 1.64-3.77, p<0.001; respectively) with moderate appearance of heterogeneity. Similarly, current smoking and former smoking also significantly increase the risk of death (OR=1.35; 95% CI: 1.12-1.62, p=0.002; and OR=2.58; 95% CI: 2.15-3.09, p<0.001; respectively) with moderate appearance of heterogeneity. There was no evidence of publication bias, which was tested by the funnel plot, Begg's test and Egger's test.ConclusionsSmoking, even current smoking or former smoking, significantly increases the risk of COVID-19 severity and death. Further causational studies on this association and ascertianing the underlying mechanisms of this relation is warranted.
| S-EPMC7857247 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate association between biomarkers and outcomes in COVID-19 hospitalised patients. COVID-19 pandemic has been a challenge. Biomarkers have always played an important role in clinical decision making in various infectious diseases. It is crucial to assess the role of biomarkers in evaluating severity of disease and appropriate allocation of resources. DESIGN AND SETTING:Systematic review and meta-analysis. English full text observational studies describing the laboratory findings and outcomes of COVID-19 hospitalised patients were identified searching PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, medRxiv using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms COVID-19 OR coronavirus OR SARS-CoV-2 OR 2019-nCoV from 1 December 2019 to 15 August 2020 following Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. PARTICIPANTS:Studies having biomarkers, including lymphocyte, platelets, D-dimer, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), C reactive protein (CRP), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), creatinine, procalcitonin (PCT) and creatine kinase (CK), and describing outcomes were selected with the consensus of three independent reviewers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Composite poor outcomes include intensive care unit admission, oxygen saturation <90%, invasive mechanical ventilation utilisation, severe disease, in-hospital admission and mortality. The OR and 95%?CI were obtained and forest plots were created using random-effects models. Publication bias and heterogeneity were assessed by sensitivity analysis. RESULTS:32 studies with 10?491 confirmed COVID-19 patients were included. We found that lymphopenia (pooled-OR: 3.33 (95% CI: 2.51-4.41); p<0.00001), thrombocytopenia (2.36 (1.64-3.40); p<0.00001), elevated D-dimer (3.39 (2.66-4.33); p<0.00001), elevated CRP (4.37 (3.37-5.68); p<0.00001), elevated PCT (6.33 (4.24-9.45); p<0.00001), elevated CK (2.42 (1.35-4.32); p=0.003), elevated AST (2.75 (2.30-3.29); p<0.00001), elevated ALT (1.71 (1.32-2.20); p<0.00001), elevated creatinine (2.84 (1.80-4.46); p<0.00001) and LDH (5.48 (3.89-7.71); p<0.00001) were independently associated with higher risk of poor outcomes. CONCLUSION:Our study found a significant association between lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia and elevated levels of CRP, PCT, LDH, D-dimer and COVID-19 severity. The results have the potential to be used as an early biomarker to improve the management of COVID-19 patients, by identification of high-risk patients and appropriate allocation of healthcare resources in the pandemic.
| S-EPMC7493072 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To successfully mitigate the extraordinary devastation caused by the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, it is crucial to identify important risk factors for this disease. One such neglected health determinant is the sex of the patient. This is an essential clinical characteristic, as it can factor into a patient's clinical management and preventative measures. Some clinical studies have shown disparities in the proportion between males and females that have more severe clinical outcomes or, subsequently, die from this disease. However, this association has not been unequivocally established. Thus, the purpose of this investigation was to examine the association between male sex and COVID-19 severity. We systematically reviewed the literature, identified studies that matched predetermined selection criteria, and performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the proportion of males among four disease severity categories. Appropriate assessment strategies were implemented to assess and minimize potential biases. The results of this meta-analysis indicated that males constituted a significantly higher proportion of those who had adverse clinical outcomes and died from COVID-19. As the coronavirus spread from the East to the West, male sex remained a consistent risk factor. Our results support the establishment of the male sex as an important risk factor for this disease. Early identification and appropriate medical care for males with lab-confirmed COVID-19 may substantially change the course of clinical prognosis, resulting in greater numbers of lives saved.
| S-EPMC7331754 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe incidence of elevated liver chemistries and the presence of pre-existing chronic liver disease (CLD) have been variably reported in COVID-19.AimsTo assess the prevalence of CLD, the incidence of elevated liver chemistries and the outcomes of patients with and without underlying CLD/elevated liver chemistries in COVID-19.MethodsA comprehensive search of electronic databases from 1 December 2019 to 24 April 2020 was done. We included studies reporting underlying CLD or elevated liver chemistries and patient outcomes in COVID-19.Results107 articles (n = 20 874 patients) were included for the systematic review. The pooled prevalence of underlying CLD was 3.6% (95% CI, 2.5-5.1) among the 15 407 COVID-19 patients. The pooled incidence of elevated liver chemistries in COVID-19 was 23.1% (19.3-27.3) at initial presentation. Additionally, 24.4% (13.5-40) developed elevated liver chemistries during the illness. The pooled incidence of drug-induced liver injury was 25.4% (14.2-41.4). The pooled prevalence of CLD among 1587 severely infected patients was 3.9% (3%-5.2%). The odds of developing severe COVID-19 in CLD patients was 0.81 (0.31-2.09; P = 0.67) compared to non-CLD patients. COVID-19 patients with elevated liver chemistries had increased risk of mortality (OR-3.46 [2.42-4.95, P < 0.001]) and severe disease (OR-2.87 [95% CI, 2.29-3.6, P < 0.001]) compared to patients without elevated liver chemistries.ConclusionsElevated liver chemistries are common at presentation and during COVID-19. The severity of elevated liver chemistries correlates with the outcome of COVID-19. The presence of CLD does not alter the outcome of COVID-19. Further studies are needed to analyse the outcomes of compensated and decompensated liver disease.
| S-EPMC7361465 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A systematic review and meta-analysis of the entire COVID-19 Tracheostomy cohort was conducted to determine the cumulative incidence of complications, mortality, time to decannulation and ventilatory weaning. Outcomes of surgical versus percutaneous and outcomes relative to tracheostomy timing were also analysed. Studies reporting outcome data on patients with COVID-19 undergoing tracheostomy were identified and screened by 2 independent reviewers. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Outcome data were analysed using a random-effects model. From 1016 unique studies, 39 articles reporting outcomes for a total of 3929 patients were included for meta-analysis. Weighted mean follow-up time was 42.03±26 days post-tracheostomy. Meta-analysis showed that 61.2% of patients were weaned from mechanical ventilation [95%CI 52.6%-69.5%], 44.2% of patients were decannulated [95%CI 33.96%-54.67%], and cumulative mortality was found to be 19.23% [95%CI 15.2%-23.6%] across the entire tracheostomy cohort. The cumulative incidence of complications was 14.24% [95%CI 9.6%-19.6%], with bleeding accounting for 52% of all complications. No difference was found in incidence of mortality (RR1.96; p=0.34), decannulation (RR1.35, p=0.27), complications (RR0.75, p=0.09) and time to decannulation (SMD 0.46, p=0.68) between percutaneous and surgical tracheostomy. Moreover, no difference was found in mortality (RR1.57, p=0.43) between early and late tracheostomy, and timing of tracheostomy did not predict time to decannulation. Ten confirmed nosocomial staff infections were reported from 1398 tracheostomies. This study provides an overview of outcomes of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients, and contributes to our understanding of tracheostomy decisions in this patient cohort.
| S-EPMC8130586 | biostudies-literature