by Nicola Potere, Emanuele Valeriani, Matteo Candeloro,
Marco Tana, Ettore Porreca, Antonio Abbate, Silvia Spoto, Anne W. S. Rutjes and
Marcello Di Nisio
Critical Care volume 24,
Article number: 389 (2020)
Background
The incidence of acute complications and mortality
associated with COVID-19 remains poorly characterized. The aims of this
systematic review and meta-analysis were to summarize the evidence on
clinically relevant outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.
Methods
MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and medRxiv were searched up to
April 20, 2020, for studies including hospitalized symptomatic adult patients
with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. The primary outcomes were all-cause
mortality and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The secondary
outcomes included acute cardiac or kidney injury, shock, coagulopathy, and
venous thromboembolism. The main analysis was based on data from peer-reviewed
studies. Summary estimates and the corresponding 95% prediction intervals (PIs)
were obtained through meta-analyses.
Results
A total of 44 peer-reviewed studies with 14,866 COVID-19
patients were included. In general, risk of bias was high. All-cause mortality
was 10% overall (95% PI, 2 to 39%; 1687/14203 patients; 43 studies), 34% in
patients admitted to intensive care units (95% PI, 8 to 76%; 659/2368 patients;
10 studies), 83% in patients requiring invasive ventilation (95% PI, 1 to 100%;
180/220 patients; 6 studies), and 75% in patients who developed ARDS (95% PI,
35 to 94%; 339/455 patients; 11 studies). On average, ARDS occurred in 14% of
patients (95% PI, 2 to 59%; 999/6322 patients; 23 studies), acute cardiac
injury in 15% (95% PI, 5 to 38%; 452/2389 patients; 10 studies), venous
thromboembolism in 15% (95% PI, 0 to 100%; patients; 3 studies), acute kidney
injury in 6% (95% PI, 1 to 41%; 318/4682 patients; 15 studies), coagulopathy in
6% (95% PI, 1 to 39%; 223/3370 patients; 9 studies), and shock in 3% (95% PI, 0
to 61%; 203/4309 patients; 13 studies).
Conclusions
Mortality was very high in critically ill patients based on
very low-quality evidence due to striking heterogeneity and risk of bias. The
incidence of clinically relevant outcomes was substantial, although reported by
only one third of the studies suggesting considerable underreporting.
No comments:
Post a Comment