COVID-19 and chronic kidney disease: an updated overview of reviews.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has resulted in the death of more than 3.5 million people worldwide. While COVID-19 mostly affects the lungs, different comorbidities can have an impact on its outcomes. We performed an overview of reviews to assess the effect of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) on contracting COVID-19, hospitalization, mortality, and disease severity.Methods
We searched published and preprint databases. We updated the reviews by searching for primary studies published after August 2020, and prioritized reviews that are most updated and of higher quality using the AMSTAR tool.Results
We included 69 systematic reviews and 66 primary studies. Twenty-eight reviews reported on the prevalence of CKD among patients with COVID-19, which ranged from 0.4 to 49.0%. One systematic review showed an increased risk of hospitalization in patients with CKD and COVID-19 (RR = 1.63, 95% CI 1.03-2.58) (Moderate certainty). Primary studies also showed a statistically significant increase of hospitalization in such patients. Thirty-seven systematic reviews assessed mortality risk in patients with CKD and COVID-19. The pooled estimates from primary studies for mortality in patients with CKD and COVID-19 showed a HR of 1.48 (95% CI 1.33-1.65) (Moderate certainty), an OR of 1.77 (95% CI 1.54-2.02) (Moderate certainty) and a RR of 1.6 (95% CI 0.88-2.92) (Low certainty).Conclusions
Our review highlights the impact of CKD on the poor outcomes of COVID-19, underscoring the importance of identifying strategies to prevent COVID-19 infection among patients with CKD.
SUBMITTER: Jdiaa SS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8747880 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundNavigating the rapidly growing body of scientific literature on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is challenging, and ongoing critical appraisal of this output is essential. We aimed to summarize and critically appraise systematic reviews of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in humans that were available at the beginning of the pandemic.MethodsNine databases (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Sciences, PDQ-Evidence, WHO's Global Research, LILACS, and Epistemonikos) were searched from December 1, 2019, to March 24, 2020. Systematic reviews analyzing primary studies of COVID-19 were included. Two authors independently undertook screening, selection, extraction (data on clinical symptoms, prevalence, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, diagnostic test assessment, laboratory, and radiological findings), and quality assessment (AMSTAR 2). A meta-analysis was performed of the prevalence of clinical outcomes.ResultsEighteen systematic reviews were included; one was empty (did not identify any relevant study). Using AMSTAR 2, confidence in the results of all 18 reviews was rated as "critically low". Identified symptoms of COVID-19 were (range values of point estimates): fever (82-95%), cough with or without sputum (58-72%), dyspnea (26-59%), myalgia or muscle fatigue (29-51%), sore throat (10-13%), headache (8-12%) and gastrointestinal complaints (5-9%). Severe symptoms were more common in men. Elevated C-reactive protein and lactate dehydrogenase, and slightly elevated aspartate and alanine aminotransferase, were commonly described. Thrombocytopenia and elevated levels of procalcitonin and cardiac troponin I were associated with severe disease. A frequent finding on chest imaging was uni- or bilateral multilobar ground-glass opacity. A single review investigated the impact of medication (chloroquine) but found no verifiable clinical data. All-cause mortality ranged from 0.3 to 13.9%.ConclusionsIn this overview of systematic reviews, we analyzed evidence from the first 18 systematic reviews that were published after the emergence of COVID-19. However, confidence in the results of all reviews was "critically low". Thus, systematic reviews that were published early on in the pandemic were of questionable usefulness. Even during public health emergencies, studies and systematic reviews should adhere to established methodological standards.
| S-EPMC8177249 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread worldwide, but safe and effective treatment options remain unavailable. Numerous systematic reviews of varying qualities have tried to summarize the evidence on the available therapeutic interventions for COVID-19. This overview of reviews aims to provide a succinct summary of the findings of systematic reviews on different pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic interventions for COVID-19.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and WHO database of publications on COVID-19 from 1 December 2019 through to 11 June 2020 for peer-reviewed systematic review studies that reported on potential pharmacological or non-pharmacological therapies for COVID-19. Quality assessment was completed using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) measure.ResultsOut of 816 non-duplicate studies, 45 were included in the overview. Antiviral and antibiotic agents, corticosteroids, and anti-malarial agents were the most common drug classes used to treat COVID-19; however, there was no direct or strong evidence to support their efficacy. Oxygen therapy and ventilatory support was the most common non-pharmacological supportive care. The quality of most of the included reviews was rated as low or critically low.ConclusionThis overview of reviews demonstrates that although some therapeutic interventions may be beneficial to specific subgroups of COVID-19 patients, the available data are insufficient to strongly recommend any particular treatment option to be used at a population level. Future systematic reviews on COVID-19 treatments should adhere to the recommended systematic review methodologies and ensure that promptness and comprehensiveness are balanced.The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.
| S-EPMC7747112 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a new member of the coronavirus family that can cause coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). COVID-9 has become a global pandemic with severe health issues around the world. Identifying the accurate immunopathogenesis of the COVID-19 and the immune response against SARS-CoV-2 is necessary for the development of therapeutic approaches and rational drug design. This paper aims to overview the updated clinical data on the immunopathogenesis of the COVID-19 and review the innate and adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2. Also, challenges of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 leading to dysfunctional immune response and their contribution to the progression of the disease have been discussed. To achieve a more efficient immune response, multiple methods could be applied, including regulation of the immune response, augmentation of the immune system against the virus, inhibition of the dysfunctional immune checkpoints, and inhibition of the viral replication/infection. Based on the immune response against SARS-CoV-2 and its dysfunction, we introduce potential immunotherapies as well as reviewing recruiting/completed clinical trials of COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7675260 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNon-adherence negatively affects the efficacy, safety and costs of therapies. Non-adherence is a multifactorial problem. This systematic review (SR) of SRs (overview) aims to identify factors that can influence the adherence of adult patients with chronic physical diseases.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE and Embase on June 13, 2018. We included SRs on the factors that can influence adherence in adult patients taking oral medications for treating physical chronic diseases. Two reviewers independently selected studies according to pre-defined inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias with the ROBIS tool. Data were extracted in standardized tables previously piloted by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. We synthesized data in tables in a structured narrative manner.ResultsWe included 21 SRs on eight different conditions. We rated eight SRs to be at low risk of bias and 13 to be at high risk of bias. Although higher education, employment, higher financial status and marriage/partnership mostly showed a positive effect on adherence, the impact was unclear because of the high uncertainty of the underlying evidence. The evidence indicates that socioeconomic status and social support might have a positive impact on adherence and that belonging to an ethnic minority might have a negative impact on adherence. Therapy-related factors (e.g., intake regime) and disease-related factors (e.g., duration) mostly showed no impact on adherence. Analysis of gender showed inconsistent results. Age might have a concave relation to adherence, i.e., adherence is lowest in very young and very old people. Depression has a negative impact on adherence. Impacts of other mental and physical comorbidities were uncertain. Co-payments (any or higher) have a negative impact on adherence. In contrast, the impacts of medication costs and insurance status were uncertain.ConclusionThis overview analyses factors that might impact adherence to oral therapies in adult patients with physical chronic diseases. Our overview suggests that there is a social gradient in adherence. However, for most factors, the evidence was not conclusive due to the risk of bias, inconsistency or imprecision.
| S-EPMC6511120 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused a global pandemic in the years 2020-2022. With a high prevalence, an easy route of transmission, and a long incubation time, SARS-CoV-2 spread quickly and affected public health and socioeconomic conditions. Several points need to be elucidated about its mechanisms of infection, in particular, its capability to evade the immune system and escape from neutralizing antibodies. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are phospholipid bilayer-delimited particles that are involved in cell-to-cell communication; they contain biological information such as miRNAs, proteins, nucleic acids, and viral components. Abundantly released from biological fluids, their dimensions are highly variable, which are used to divide them into exosomes (40 to 150 nm), microvesicles (40 to 10,000 nm), and apoptotic bodies (100-5000 nm). EVs are involved in many physiological and pathological processes. In this article, we report the latest evidence about EVs' roles in viral infections, focusing on the dual role of exosomes in promoting and inhibiting SARS-CoV-2 infection. The involvement of mesenchymal stromal/stem cells (MSCs) and MSC-derived EVs in COVID-19 treatment, such as the use of translational exosomes as a diagnostical/therapeutic approach, is also investigated. These elucidations could be useful to better direct the discovery of future diagnostical tools and new exosome-derived COVID-19 biomarkers, which can help achieve optimal therapeutic interventions and implement future vaccine strategies.
| S-EPMC10611252 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe significance of chronic kidney disease on susceptibility to COVID-19 and subsequent outcomes remains unaddressed.ObjectiveTo investigate the association of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) on risk of contracting COVID-19 and subsequent adverse outcomes.MethodsRates of hospital-diagnosed COVID-19 were compared across strata of eGFR based on conditional logistic regression using a nested case-control framework with 1:4 matching of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 with controls from the Danish general population on age, gender, diabetes and hypertension. Risk of subsequent severe COVID-19 or death was assessed in a cohort study with comparisons across strata of eGFR based on adjusted Cox regression models with G-computation of results to determine 60-day risk standardized to the distribution of risk factors in the sample.ResultsEstimated glomerular filtration rate was inversely associated with rate of hospital-diagnosed COVID-19: eGFR 61-90 mL/min/1.73m2 HR 1.13 (95% CI 1.03-1.25), P = 0.011; eGFR 46-60 mL/min/1.73m2 HR 1.26 (95% CI 1.06-1.50), P = 0.008; eGFR 31-45 mL/min/1.73m2 HR 1.68 (95% CI 1.34-2.11), P < 0.001; and eGFR ≤ 30 mL/min/1.73m2 3.33 (95% CI 2.50-4.42), P < 0.001 (eGFR > 90 mL/min/1.73m2 as reference), and renal impairment was associated with progressive increase in standardized 60-day risk of death or severe COVID-19; eGFR > 90 mL/min/1.73m2 13.9% (95% CI 9.7-15.0); eGFR 90-61 mL/min/1.73m2 16.1% (95% CI 14.5-17.7); eGFR 46-60 mL/min/1.73m2 17.8% (95% CI 14.7-21.2); eGFR 31-45 mL/min/1.73m2 22.6% (95% CI 18.2-26.2); and eGFR ≤ 30 mL/min/1.73m2 23.6% (95% CI 18.1-29.1).ConclusionsRenal insufficiency was associated with progressive increase in both rate of hospital-diagnosed COVID-19 and subsequent risk of adverse outcomes. Results underscore a possible vulnerability associated with impaired renal function in relation to COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8014284 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 causes significant mortality during the recent pandemic. Data regarding the effectiveness of Paxlovid on COVID-19 patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD, eGFR <90 ml/min) are limited.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed on the clinical data of the hospitalized adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection collected at Renji Hospital from April 7, 2022 to June 21, 2022. The association of Paxlovid treatment with early (within 5 days post diagnosis) or late (5 days or later post diagnosis) initiation time with clinical outcomes was assessed by Cox proportional hazards regression model with time-dependent covariates.Result1279 of 2387 enrollees were included in the study. Patients with early initiation of Paxlovid had a lower all-cause death rate compared to those with late initiation or without Paxlovid treatment (P = 0.046). For the CKD patients with Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) > 7, the early initiation of Paxlovid was associated with a lower all-cause death rate compared to the later initiation or the lack of Paxlovid treatment (P = 0.041). Cox regression analyses revealed that eGFR (HR 4.21 [95%, CI 1.62-10.99]), Paxlovid treatment (0.32 [0.13-0.77]), CCI (4.32 [1.64-11.40]), ICU admission (2.65 [1.09-6.49]), hsCRP (3.88 [1.46-7.80]), chronic liver disease (4.02 [1.09-14.85]) were the independent risk factors for all-cause death for CKD patients after adjusting for demographics and biochemical indexes.ConclusionsAll-cause death, invasive ventilation, and ICU admission were all significantly lowered by an early initiation of Paxlovid treatment in COVID-19 patients with severe CKD.
| S-EPMC10290896 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNovel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in Wuhan and rapidly spread, affecting >10 million cases worldwide. Caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and primarily manifesting as an acute respiratory failure with interstitial and alveolar pneumonia, it can also affect multiple organs. Kidney involvement was underestimated in early reports and its role remains controversial. The aim of this study was to analyse the role of kidney damage in COVID-19 outcome.MethodsThis is a prospective cohort study of 1603 consecutive patients admitted in a University Reference Hospital in the heart of the European outbreak.ResultsMedian age was 64 years, 40.4% were female, 15.2% presented diabetes mellitus, 35.7% hypertension and 20.3% obesity. On admission, the prevalence of elevated serum creatinine (sCr), proteinuria, leucocyturia and haematuria were 21.0, 37.8, 31.8 and 45.6%, respectively. In total, 43.5% of those with an elevated sCr had previous chronic kidney disease (CKD) and 11.4% of those with normal sCr developed an in-hospital acute kidney injury (AKI); 17 patients needed acute haemodialysis; and 197 patients died during hospitalization. Cox proportional hazard regression confirmed that elevated baseline sCr [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) 2.40 (1.79-3.22)], previous CKD [1.59 (1.06-2.37)], haematuria [1 + 1.68 (0.92-3.06), 2-3 + 2.69 (1.49-4.87)] and in-hospital AKI [1.50 (0.92-2.44)] were independent risk factors for in-hospital death after adjusting for age, sex and comorbidity.ConclusionThe prevalence of acute and chronic kidney disease on admission and in-hospital AKI is higher than previously reported in Wuhan, and is associated with high in-hospital mortality. We should increase our awareness towards kidney involvement and design specific strategies for management of COVID-19 in these patients.
| S-EPMC7462722 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Traditional observational research has revealed an association between severe COVID-19 and chronic kidney disease (CKD). It is unclear whether there is a causative connection between them. Our goal was to determine whether genetically predicted CKD is associated with the risk of critical COVID-19. We aimed to investigate potential underlying genetic mechanisms that could explain this relationship, paving the way for personalized risk assessment and targeted interventions to mitigate the effects of COVID-19 on individuals with CKD. Using combined data from a GWAS on European ancestry and CKD (n = 117,165) and critical COVID-19 (n = 1,059,456), bidirectional Mendelian randomization analysis was performed. Four single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were chosen from the genome as CKD instrumental variables (IVs). In addition to MR‒Egger regression, weighted mode approaches, and weighted medians, we employed the inverse-variance weighted estimate as our primary analytical method. A significant association of CKD with critical COVID-19 (OR = 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04-1.58, p = 0.01811) was found. However, using 6 genome-wide significant SNPs as IVs for critical COVID-19, we could not discover a meaningful correlation between severe COVID-19 and CKD (OR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.96-1.10, p = 0.3947). We found evidence to support a causal relationship between CKD and severe COVID-19 in European population. This underscores the need for comprehensive monitoring and specialized care strategies for individuals with CKD to mitigate the heightened risk and severity of COVID-19 complications.
| S-EPMC10823696 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSince the beginning of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, various complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) have been used in clinical practice. In this overview, we summarized the evidence for CAM interventions in the treatment of COVID-19 patients.MethodsFor this overview, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to October 2021. Systematic reviews (SRs) on the effectiveness and safety of CAM interventions for COVID-19 patients were located, and the MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) was used to evaluate the reporting quality of the included SRs. Keywords including COVID-19 and CAM interventions were used for locating SRs. For evidence mapping, we created a two-dimensional bubble plot that included the width and strength of the evidence for each CAM intervention and specific outcome.ResultsIn this overview, we identified 24 SRs (21 for Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) medications, two for vitamin D and one for home-based activity). From the included SRs, TCM herbal medications were reported to show good results in decreasing the rate of disease progression (relative risk (RR) 0.30, 95% confidence intervals (CI) [0.20, 0.44]), time to the resolution of fever (standard mean difference (SMD) -0.98, 95% CI [-1.78, -0.17]) and rate of progression to severe COVID-19 cases (RR 0.34, 95% CI [0.18, 0.65]), but the evidence for other interventions did not show effectiveness with certainty. Gastric disturbance was a major adverse event of TCM medications.ConclusionThere is evidence that TCM medications are effective in the symptom management of COVID-19 patients. However, evidence for the effectiveness of most CAM interventions still needs evaluation.
| S-EPMC8918082 | biostudies-literature