Dataset Information

Electrocardiography on admission is associated with poor outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Electrocardiogram (ECG) is a widely accessible diagnostic tool that can easily be obtained on admission and can reduce excessive contact with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the latest evidence on the association of ECG on admission and the poor outcomes in COVID-19.

Methods

A literature search was conducted on online databases for observational studies evaluating ECG parameters and composite poor outcomes comprising ICU admission, severe illness, and mortality in COVID-19 patients.

Results

A total of 2,539 patients from seven studies were included in this analysis. Pooled analysis showed that a longer corrected QT (QTc) interval and more frequent prolonged QTc interval were associated with composite poor outcome ([WMD 6.04 [2.62-9.45], P = .001; I ²:0%] and [RR 1.89 [1.52-2.36], P < .001; I ²:17%], respectively). Patients with poor outcome had a longer QRS duration and a faster heart rate compared with patients with good outcome ([WMD 2.03 [0.20-3.87], P = .030; I ²:46.1%] and [WMD 5.96 [0.96-10.95], P = .019; I ²:55.9%], respectively). The incidence of left bundle branch block (LBBB), premature atrial contraction (PAC), and premature ventricular contraction (PVC) were higher in patients with poor outcome ([RR 2.55 [1.19-5.47], P = .016; I ²:65.9%]; [RR 1.94 [1.32-2.86], P = .001; I ²:62.8%]; and [RR 1.84 [1.075-3.17], P = .026; I ²:70.6%], respectively). T-wave inversion and ST-depression were more frequent in patients with poor outcome ([RR 1.68 [1.31-2.15], P < .001; I ²:14.3%] and [RR 1.61 [1.31-2.00], P < .001; I ²:49.5%], respectively).

Conclusion

Most ECG abnormalities on admission are significantly associated with an increased composite poor outcome in patients with COVID-19.

SUBMITTER: Alsagaff MY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8339106 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective:Clinical and laboratory biomarkers to predict the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are essential in this pandemic situation of which resource allocation must be urgently prepared especially in the context of respiratory support readiness. Lymphocyte count has been a marker of interest since the first COVID-19 publication. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in order to investigate the association of lymphocyte count on admission and the severity of COVID-19. We would also like to analyze whether patient characteristics such as age and comorbidities affect the relationship between lymphocyte count and COVID-19. Methods:Comprehensive and systematic literature search was performed from PubMed, SCOPUS, EuropePMC, ProQuest, Cochrane Central Databases, and Google Scholar. Research articles in adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 with information on lymphocyte count and several outcomes of interest, including mortality, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), intensive care unit (ICU) care, and severe COVID-19, were included in the analysis. Inverse variance method was used to obtain mean differences and its standard deviations. Maentel-Haenszel formula was used to calculate dichotomous variables to obtain odds ratios (ORs) along with its 95% confidence intervals. Random-effect models were used for meta-analysis regardless of heterogeneity. Restricted-maximum likelihood random-effects meta-regression was performed for age, gender, cardiac comorbidity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, COPD, and smoking. Results:There were a total of 3099 patients from 24 studies. Meta-analysis showed that patients with poor outcome have a lower lymphocyte count (mean difference - 361.06 μL [- 439.18, - 282.95], p < 0.001; I 2 84%) compared to those with good outcome. Subgroup analysis showed lower lymphocyte count in patients who died (mean difference - 395.35 μL [- 165.64, - 625.07], p < 0.001; I 2 87%), experienced ARDS (mean difference - 377.56 μL [- 271.89, - 483.22], p < 0.001; I 2 0%), received ICU care (mean difference - 376.53 μL [- 682.84, - 70.22], p = 0.02; I 2 89%), and have severe COVID-19 (mean difference - 353.34 μL [- 250.94, - 455.73], p < 0.001; I 2 85%). Lymphopenia was associated with severe COVID-19 (OR 3.70 [2.44, 5.63], p < 0.001; I 2 40%). Meta-regression showed that the association between lymphocyte count and composite poor outcome was affected by age (p = 0.034). Conclusion:This meta-analysis showed that lymphopenia on admission was associated with poor outcome in patients with COVID-19.

Project description:BackgroundAs the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues, healthcare providers struggle to manage both COVID-19 and non-COVID patients while still providing high-quality care. We conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis to describe the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with non-COVID illness and on healthcare systems compared to non-pandemic epochs.MethodsWe searched Ovid MEDLINE/EMBASE/Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/CENTRAL/CINAHL (inception to December 31, 2020). All study types with COVID-pandemic time period (after December 31, 2019) with comparative non-pandemic time periods (prior to December 31, 2019). Data regarding study characteristics/case-mix/interventions/comparators/ outcomes (primary: mortality; secondary: morbidity/hospitalizations/disruptions-to-care. Paired reviewers conducted screening and abstraction, with conflicts resolved by discussion. Effect sizes for specific therapies were pooled using random-effects models. Risk of bias was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, with evidence rating using GRADE methodology.ResultsOf 11,581 citations, 167 studies met eligibility. Our meta-analysis showed an increased mortality of 16% during the COVID pandemic for non-COVID illness compared with 11% mortality during the pre-pandemic period (RR 1.38, 95% CI: 1.28-1.50; absolute risk difference: 5% [95% CI: 4-6%], p<0.00001, very low certainty evidence). Twenty-eight studies (17%) reported significant changes in morbidity (where 93% reported increases), while 30 studies (18%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). Thirty-nine studies (23%) reported significant changes in hospitalizations (97% reporting decreases), while 111 studies (66%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). Sixty-two studies (37%) reported significant disruptions in standards-to-care (73% reporting increases), while 62 studies (37%) reported no significant change (very low certainty).ConclusionsThere was a significant increase in mortality during the COVID pandemic compared to pre-pandemic times for non-COVID illnesses. When significant changes were reported, there was increased morbidity, decreased hospitalizations and increased disruptions in standards-of-care.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020201256 (Sept 2, 2020).

Project description:Importance: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly emerging infectious disease that has caused a global pandemic. The presenting symptoms are mainly respiratory symptom, yet studies have reported nervous system involvement in the disease. A systematic review and meta-analysis of these studies are required to understanding the neurologic characteristic of the disease and help physicians with early diagnosis and management. Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the neurologic characteristics in patients with COVID-19. Evidence Review: Authors conducted a literature search through PubMed from January 1st, 2020 to April 8th, 2020. Furthermore, the authors added additional sources by reviewing related references. Studies presenting the neurologic features of COVID-19 patients in their data were included. Case reports and case series were also included in this review. The quality of the studies was assessed based on the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines. Selected studies were included in the meta-analysis of proportion and the heterogeneity test. Finding: From 280 identified studies, 33 were eligible, with 7,559 participants included. Most of the included studies were from China (29 [88%]). Muscle injury or myalgia was the most common (19.2%, 95%CI 15.4-23.2%) neurologic symptom of COVID-19, followed by headache (10.9%, 95%CI 8.62-13.51%); dizziness (8.7%, 95%CI 5.02-13.43%); nausea with or without vomiting (4.6%, 95%CI 3.17-6.27%); concurrent cerebrovascular disease (4.4%, 95%CI 1.92-7.91%); and impaired consciousness (3.8%, 95%CI 0.16-12.04%). Underlying cerebrovascular disease was found in 8.5% (95%CI 4.5-13.5%) of the studies. Conclusion: Neurologic findings vary from non-specific to specific symptoms in COVID-19 patients. Some severe symptoms or diseases can present in the later stage of the disease. Physicians should be aware of the presence of neurologic signs and symptoms as a chief complaint of COVID-19, in order to improve management and prevent a worsening outcome of the patients.