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:Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a major cause of mortality in patients with renal failure. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the rates, predictors, and outcomes of GIB in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). A search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was performed, and data were extracted from relevant studies. Statistical pooling was performed to determine the rate of GIB in patients with CKD, and a random-effect meta-analysis was performed to determine the predictors of GIB and mortality in patients with GIB. Twenty-two studies were included in this review, with 7,810,273 patients with CKD included in the analysis. The pooled results of five studies suggested that the rate of GIB in patients with CKD was 2.2%, and among the studies in which patients with CKD underwent endoscopy, the pooled results for GIB were 35.8%. Receipt of dialysis (OR 14.48, 95%CI 4.96-42.32), older age (OR 1.03, 95%CI 1.02-1.05), diabetes mellitus (OR 1.30, 95%CI 1.22-1.39), history of ulcers (OR 1.53, 95%CI 1.03-2.26), and cirrhosis (OR 1.73, 95%CI 1.41-2.12) were significantly associated with GIB. The pooled results suggest a twofold increase in the odds of mortality with GIB, with significant heterogeneity (OR 2.12, 95%CI 1.45-3.10, I2 = 93%). GIB in patients with CKD affects 2% of patients but can be greater in the group of patients who underwent endoscopy. Receipt of dialysis is a strong predictor of GIB, and sustained GIB is associated with a twofold increase in the odds of mortality compared to patients without GIB.
| S-EPMC10796123 | 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:ObjectiveThe 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.DesignA 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.ResultsOf 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.ConclusionEarly 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:There remains no consensus on the prognostic value of lactate in predicting adverse outcomes such as mortality, rebleeding and higher intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The present study aimed to determine the prognostic accuracy of lactate level in predicting adverse clinical outcomes in patients with acute UGIB. Systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed Central, SCOPUS, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Google Scholar and ScienceDirect databases for studies published up to February 2023. Random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis and the results were presented as pooled standardized mean differences or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CIs). A total of 11 studies were included in the present review. Most of the studies had a high risk of bias. Pooled OR were as follows: 1.39 (95% CI: 1.29-1.51; I2=85%) for the prediction of mortality; 1.29 (95% CI: 1.17-1.42; I2=85.9%) for prediction of ICU admission, 1.14 (95% CI: 1.06-1.23; I2=42.4%) for rebleeding and 2.84 (95% CI: 2.14-3.77; I2=8.1%) for the need of packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusion. Sensitivity and specificity for the mortality prediction were 72% (95% CI: 57-83%) and 75% (95% CI: 61-85%), respectively, with the area under the curve of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.72-0.85). In conclusion, the results showed that lactate level is a moderately accurate early prediction marker of most adverse clinical outcomes such as mortality, rebleeding, ICU admission and the need for pRBC transfusion in acute UGIB patients.
| S-EPMC10867736 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionGastrointestinal bleeding results in significant morbidity, cost and mortality. TXA, an antifibrinolytic agent, has been proposed to reduce mortality; however, many studies report conflicting results.MethodsThe aim of the study was to perform the first systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs to evaluate the efficacy TXA for both upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding. This was performed per PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Scopus databases were searched for RCTs. Dichotomous variables were pooled as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the MH method with random effects modelling.ResultsFourteen RCTs were identified with 14,338 patients and mean age of 58.4 years. 34.9% (n = 5008) were female and 65.1% (n = 9330) male. There was no significant difference in mortality between TXA and placebo (RR 0.86 95% CI (0.74 to 1.00), P: 0.05). The secondary outcomes, similarly, did not yield significant results. These included rebleeding, need for surgical intervention (RR: 0.75 95% CI (0.53, 1.07)), endoscopic intervention (RR: 0.92 95% CI (0.70, 1.22)), transfusion requirement (RR: 1.01 95% CI (0.94, 10.7)) and length of stay (RR: 0.03 95% CI (- 0.03, 0.08)). There was no increased risk of VTE, RR: 1.29 95% CI (0.53, 3.16). One trial (n = 12,009) reported an increased risk of seizure in the TXA group, RR: 1.73 95% CI (1.03-2.93).ConclusionTXA does not reduce mortality in patients with acute upper or lower gastrointestinal bleeding and may confer an increased risk of seizures. The authors do not recommend the use of TXA in acute gastrointestinal bleeding.
| S-EPMC10961292 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsA 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.ConclusionGastrointestinal 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: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