Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background/aims
More than 100 million people to date have been affected by the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Patients with COVID-19 have a higher risk of bleeding complications. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the outcomes of COVID-19 patients with signs and symptoms of acute gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB).Methods
A systematic literature search was carried out for articles published until until November 11, 2020, in the Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. We included studies on COVID-19 patients with signs and symptoms of GIB.Results
Our search yielded 49 studies, of which eight with a collective 127 patients (86 males and 41 females) met our inclusion criteria. Conservative management alone was performed in 59% of the patients, endoscopic evaluation in 31.5%, and interventional radiology (IR) embolization in 11%. Peptic ulcer disease was the most common endoscopic finding, diagnosed in 47.5% of the patients. Pooled overall mortality was 19.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]; 12.7%-27.6%) and pooled mortality secondary to GIB was 3.5% (95% CI; 1.3%-9.1%). The pooled risk of rebleeding was 11.3% (95% CI; 6.8%-18.4%).Conclusion
The majority of COVID-19 patients with GIB responded to conservative management, with a low mortality rate associated with GIB and the risk of rebleeding. Thus, we suggest limiting endoscopic and IR interventions to those with hemodynamic instability and those for whom conservative management was unsuccessful.
SUBMITTER: Iqbal U
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8357590 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been reported to affect the gastrointestinal system with a variety of symptoms, including bleeding. The prevalence of bleeding in these patients remains unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis is to estimate the rate of gastrointestinal bleeding in COVID-19 patients and its association with mortality. MEDLINE and Embase were searched through December 20, 2020. Studies reporting COVID-19 patients with and without gastrointestinal bleeding were included. Estimated prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was pooled; heterogeneity was expressed as I 2. Metaregression analysis was performed to assess the impact of confounding covariates. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. A total of 91887 COVID-19 patients were considered, of whom 534 reported gastrointestinal bleeding (0.6%) [409 (76.6%) upper and 121 (22.7%) lower gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB and LGIB, resp.)]. The overall pooled gastrointestinal bleeding rate was 5% [95% CI 2-8], with high heterogeneity (I 2 99.2%); "small study effect" was observed using the Egger test (p=0.049). After removing two outlier studies, the pooled bleeding rate was 2% [95% CI 0-4], with high heterogeneity (I 2 99.2%), and no "small study effect" (p=0.257). The pooled UGIB rate was 1% (95% CI 0-3, I 2 98.6%, p=0.214), whereas the pooled LGIB rate was 1% (95% CI 0-2, I 2 64.7%, p=0.919). Metaregression analysis showed that overall estimates on gastrointestinal bleeding were affected by studies reporting different sources of bleeding. No significant association between gastrointestinal bleeding and mortality was found. In this meta-analysis of published studies, individuals with COVID-19 were found to be at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding, especially upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
| S-EPMC8429023 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background COVID-19 pandemic has created a need to identify potential predictors of severe disease. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of gastrointestinal predictors of severe COVID-19. Methods An extensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane. Odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) were calculated for proportional and continuous outcomes using a random-effect model. For each outcome, a 95% confidence interval (CI) and P-value were generated. Results A total of 83 studies (26912 patients, mean age 43.5±16.4 years, 48.2% female) were included. Gastrointestinal predictors of severe COVID-19 included the presence of diarrhea (OR 1.50, 95%CI 1.10-2.03; P=0.01), elevated serum aspartate aminotransferase (AST) (OR 4.00, 95%CI 3.02-5.28; P<0.001), and elevated serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (OR 2.54, 95%CI 1.91-3.37; P<0.001). Significantly higher levels of mean AST (MD 14.78 U/L, 95%CI 11.70-17.86 U/L; P<0.001), ALT (MD 11.87 U/L, 95%CI 9.23-14.52 U/L; P<0.001), and total bilirubin (MD 2.08 mmol/L, 95%CI 1.36-2.80 mmol/L; P<0.001) were observed in the severe COVID-19 group compared to non-severe COVID-19 group. Conclusion Gastrointestinal symptoms and biomarkers should be assessed early to recognize severe COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7599357 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective:The use of early colonoscopy in the management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is controversial, with disparate evidence. We aim to formally characterize the utility of early colonoscopy (within 24 h) in managing acute LGIB. Design:A systematic literature search to August 2016 identified fully published and abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies assessing early colonoscopy in acute LGIB. Single-arm studies were also included to define incidence. Primary outcomes were overall rebleeding rates and time to rebleeding. Secondary outcomes included mortality, surgery, length of stay (LOS), definite cause of bleeding and adverse events (AEs). Odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated. Results:Of 897 citations, 10 single-arm, 9 observational studies, and 2 RCTS were included (25,781 patients). Rebleeding was no different between patients undergoing early colonoscopy and controls (seven studies, OR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.49-1.62), or RCT data only (OR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.52-1.62). Early colonoscopy detected more definitive sources of bleeding (OR = 4.12, 95% CI 2.00-8.49), and was associated with shorter LOS colonoscopy (WMD = -1.52, 95% CI -2.54 to -0.50 days). No other differences were noted between early and late colonoscopy. AEs occurred in 4.0%, (95% CI 2.9%; 5.4%) of early colonoscopies. Included studies were of low quality, with significant heterogeneity for some outcomes. Conclusion:Early colonoscopy in acute LGIB does not decrease rebleeding, mortality or need for surgery, but is associated with increased detection of definitive sources of bleeding, shorter LOS, with low complication incidence. However, the quality of evidence is low, highlighting the need for additional high-level studies.
| S-EPMC5821297 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe impact of gastrointestinal endoscopy on COVID-19 infection remains poorly investigated. We herein performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the outcomes of COVID-19 in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.MethodOvid Medline, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid the Cochrane Library, and other electronic databases were searched until 30 November 2020 to identify publications with confirmed COVID-19 infection in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. The primary outcomes were SARS-CoV-2 transmission, personal protective equipment use, rates of case fatality, complications, and procedural success.ResultsA total of 18 articles involving 329 patients were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall basic reproduction rate is 0.37, while the subgroup results from Asia, Europe, and North America are 0.13, 0.44, and 0.33, respectively. The differences in personal protective equipment use between the positive transmission and non-transmission group are mainly in isolation gowns, N95 or equivalent masks, and goggles or face-shields. The rate of case fatality, complication, and procedural success are 0.17 (95% confidence interval = 0.02-0.38), 0.00 (95% confidence interval = 0.00-0.02), and 0.89 (95% confidence interval = 0.50-1.00), respectively. The fatality rate in Europe was the highest (0.23, 95% confidence interval = 0.04-0.50), which is significantly different from other continents (p = 0.034).ConclusionThe risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission within gastrointestinal endoscopy units is considerably low if proper use of personal protective equipment is applied. Similarly, a low fatality and complication rate, as well as a high procedural success rate, indicated that a full recovery of endoscopic units should be considered.
| S-EPMC8408897 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the prevalence of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosed. METHODS:A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus was performed from December 1, 2019 to May 7, 2020. Observational studies including adults with COVID-19 infection and reporting GI symptoms were included. The primary outcome was assessing the weighted pooled prevalence (WPP) of GI symptoms in patients with COVID-19 infection. Secondary outcomes were WPP of overall mortality, and mortality in patients with COVID-19 infection with GI symptoms. RESULTS:A total of 78 studies with 12,797 patients were included. Among GI symptoms (at onset of illness in 6, at admission in 17, data given separately for both in 3, and data unavailable in 52 studies), the WPP of diarrhea was 12.4% (95% CI, 8.2% to 17.1%), I2=94%; nausea and/or vomiting, 9.0% (95% CI, 5.5% to 12.9%), I2=93%; loss of appetite, 22.3% (95% CI, 11.2% to 34.6%, I2=94%; and abdominal pain, 6.2% (95% CI, 2.6% to 10.3%), I2=92%. Mortality among patients with GI symptoms (0.4%; 95% CI, 0% to 1.1%; I2=74%) was similar to overall mortality (2.1%; 95% CI, 0.2% to 4.7%; I2=94%), P=.15. Most studies had high risk of bias and overall quality of evidence was low to very low for all outcomes. CONCLUSION:Gastrointestinal symptoms are seen in up to 1 in 5 patients with COVID-19 infection. More high-quality evidence is needed to confirm these findings and explore factors causing mortality in these patients.
| S-EPMC7284248 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although not common, gastrointestinal and liver symptoms have reportedly been the initial presentation of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in a large group of patients. Therefore, knowing the frequency and characteristics of these manifestations of COVID-19 is important for both clinicians and health policy makers. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the available data on the gastrointestinal and liver manifestations of patients with COVID-19 was performed. PubMed and Scopus databases and Google Scholar search engine were searched for published and unpublished preprint articles up to 10 April 2020. Original studies providing information on clinical digestive symptoms or biomarkers of liver function in patients with polymerase chain reaction confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were included. After quality appraisal, data were extracted. Prevalence data from individual studies were pooled using a random-effects model. Overall, 67 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis, comprising a pooled population of 13 251 patients with confirmed COVID-19. The most common gastrointestinal symptoms were anorexia (10.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.2%-16.4%), diarrhea (8.4%, 95% CI = 6.2%-11.2%), and nausea (5.7%, 95% CI = 3.7%-8.6%), respectively. Decreased albumin levels (39.8%, 95% CI = 15.3%-70.8%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (22.8%, 95% CI = 18.1%-28.4%), and alanine aminotransferase (20.6%, 95% CI = 16.7%-25.1%) were common hepatic findings. After adjusting for preexisting gastrointestinal (5.9%) and liver diseases (4.2%), the most common gastrointestinal findings were diarrhea (8.7%, 95% CI = 5.4%-13.9%), anorexia (8.0%, 95% CI = 3.0%-19.8%), and nausea (5.1%, 95% CI = 2.2%-14.3%). Gastrointestinal and liver manifestations are not rare in patients with COVID-19, but their prevalence might be affected by preexisting diseases. Diarrhea and mild liver abnormalities seem to be relatively common in COVID-19, regardless of comorbidities.
| S-EPMC7405277 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aim:To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the weekend effect on the mortality of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding(UGIB). Methods:The review protocol has been registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (registration number: CRD42017073313) and was written according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We conducted a search of the PUBMED, COCHRANE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases from inception to August 2017. All observational studies comparing mortality between UGIB patients with weekend versus weekday admissions were included. Articles that were published only in abstract form or not published in a peer-reviewed journal were excluded. The quality of articles was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We pooled results from the articles using random-effect models. Heterogeneity was evaluated by the chi-square-based Q-test and I2 test. To address heterogeneity, we performed sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Potential publication bias was assessed via funnel plot. Results:Eighteen observational cohort studies involving 1,232,083 study patients were included. Weekend admission was associated with significantly higher 30-day or in-hospital mortality in all studies (OR = 1.12, 95% CI [1.07-1.17], P < 0.00001). Increased in-hospital mortality was also associated with weekend admission (OR = 1.12, 95% CI [1.08-1.17], P < 0.00001). No significant difference in in-hospital mortality was observed between patients admitted with variceal bleeding during the weekend or on weekdays (OR = 0.99, 95% CI [0.91-1.08], P = 0.82); however, weekend admission was associated with a 15% increase in in-hospital mortality for patients with non-variceal bleeding (OR = 1.15, 95% CI [1.09-1.21], P < 0.00001). The time to endoscopy for weekday admission was significantly less than that obtained for weekend admission (MD = -2.50, 95% CI [-4.08--0.92], P = 0.002). Conclusions:The weekend effect is associated with increased mortality of UGIB patients, particularly in non-variceal bleeding. The timing of endoscopic intervention might be a factor that influences mortality of UGIB patients.
| S-EPMC5768163 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess whether corticosteroids are associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, double-blind, controlled trials comparing a corticosteroid to placebo for any medical condition or in healthy participants. Studies with steroids given either locally, as a single dose, or in crossover studies were excluded.Data sourcesLiterature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews between 1983 and 22 May 2013.Outcome measureOutcome measures were the occurrence of gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation. Predefined subgroup analyses were carried out for disease severity, use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or gastroprotective drugs, and history of peptic ulcer.Results159 studies (N=33?253) were included. In total, 804 (2.4%) patients had a gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation (2.9% and 2.0% for corticosteroids and placebo). Corticosteroids increased the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation by 40% (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.66). The risk was increased for hospitalised patients (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.66). For patients in ambulatory care, the increased risk was not statistically significant (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 6.34). Only 11 gastrointestinal bleeds or perforations occurred among 8651 patients in ambulatory care (0.13%). Increased risk was still present in subgroup analyses (studies with NSAID use excluded; OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.71, peptic ulcer as an exclusion criterion excluded; OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.78, and use of gastroprotective drugs excluded; OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.67).ConclusionsCorticosteroid use was associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation. The increased risk was statistically significant for hospitalised patients only. For patients in ambulatory care, the total occurrence of bleeding or perforation was very low, and the increased risk was not statistically significant.
| S-EPMC4025450 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) has been described as a frequent and prognostically relevant complication of COVID-19 infection. AIM:We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the in-hospital incidence of acute PE among COVID-19 patients based on studies published within four months of COVID-19 outbreak. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed in abstracting data and assessing validity. We searched Medline, Scopus and Web of Science to locate all articles published up to August 1, 2020 reporting the incidence of acute PE (or lung thrombosis) in COVID-19 patients. The pooled in-hospital incidence of acute PE among COVID-19 patients was calculated using a random effects model and presenting the related 95% confidence interval (CI). Statistical heterogeneity was measured using the Higgins I2 statistic. RESULTS:We analysed data from 7178 COVID-19 patients [mean age 60.4 years] included in twenty-three studies. Among patients hospitalized in general wards and intensive care unit (ICU), the pooled in-hospital incidence of PE (or lung thrombosis) was 14.7% of cases (95% CI: 9.9-21.3%, I2=95.0%, p<0.0001) and 23.4% (95% CI:16.7-31.8%, I2=88.7%, p<0.0001), respectively. Segmental/sub-segmental pulmonary arteries were more frequently involved compared to main/lobar arteries (6.8% vs18.8%, p<0.001). Computer tomography pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) was used only in 35.3% of patients with COVID-19 infection across six studies. CONCLUSIONS:The in-hospital incidence of acute PE among COVID-19 patients is higher in ICU patients compared to those hospitalized in general wards. CTPA was rarely used suggesting a potential underestimation of PE cases.
| S-EPMC7498252 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimThis review investigates the role of gastrointestinal and hepatic manifestations in COVID-19, particularly with regard to the prevalence of isolated gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library for COVID-19 publications from 1 December 2019 to 18 May 2020. We included any study that reported the presence of GI symptoms in a sample of >5 COVID-19 patients. Data collection and risk of bias assessment were performed independently by two reviewers. Where ?3 studies reported data sufficiently similar to allow calculation of a pooled prevalence, we performed random effects meta-analysis.ResultsThis review included 17?776 COVID-19 patients from 108 studies. Isolated GI symptoms only occurred in 1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0-6%) of patients. GI symptoms were reported in 20% (95% CI 15-24%) of patients. The most common were anorexia (21%, 95% CI 15-27%), diarrhea (13%, 95% CI 11-16%), nausea or vomiting (8%, 95% CI 6-11%), and abdominal pain (4%, 95% CI 2-6%). Transaminase elevations were present in 24% (95% CI 17-31%) of patients. Higher prevalence of GI symptoms were reported in studies published after 1st April, with prevalence of diarrhea 16% (95% CI 13-20), nausea or vomiting 12% (95% CI 8-16%), and any GI symptoms 24% (95% CI 18-34%). GI symptoms were associated with severe COVID-19 disease (odds ratio [OR] 2.1, 95% CI 1.3-3.2), but not mortality (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.52-1.54).ConclusionsPatients with isolated GI symptoms may represent a small but significant portion of COVID-19 cases. When testing resources are abundant, clinicians should still consider testing patients with isolated GI symptoms or unexplained transaminase elevations for COVID-19. More recent studies estimate higher overall GI involvement in COVID-19 than was previously recognized.
| S-EPMC7753450 | biostudies-literature