Risk factors for poor prognosis in children and adolescents with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
TL;DR: In this paper, a systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to identify the predictors of unfavorable prognosis of COVID-19 in children and adolescents, and the effect size with 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated.
About: This article is published in EClinicalMedicine.The article was published on 2021-11-01 and is currently open access. It has received 26 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Intensive care & Odds ratio.
Citations
More filters
01 Feb 2023
TL;DR: In this paper , the primary series and booster vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospitalisation among adolescents in Singapore was evaluated. But the effectiveness of the booster vaccination was not evaluated.
Abstract: Singapore offered the BNT162b2 vaccine (tozinameran; Pfizer-BioNTech) to adolescents aged 12-17 years in May 18, 2021, and extended booster vaccines to this group in Jan 21, 2022. Literature on the effectiveness of primary series and booster vaccination among adolescents is scarce outside of Europe and North America. We aimed to determine primary series and booster vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospitalisation among adolescents in Singapore.For this national cohort study, we assessed the incidence of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospitalisation among adolescents aged 12-17 years vaccinated with BNT162b2 in Singapore from Sept 1 to Dec 15, 2021, during the delta (B.1.617.2) variant wave, and from Jan 21 to April 28, 2022, during the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant wave. Data were collected from official databases maintained by the Ministry of Health of Singapore. Individuals were classified as partly vaccinated (those who had received one dose and those who had received the second dose no more than 7 days previously), fully vaccinated (8 days after receiving a second dose), or boosted (8 days after receiving a third dose) and compared with unvaccinated individuals.249 763 individuals aged 12-17 years were included in the study, contributing over 56·2 million person-days of observation. Compared with unvaccinated individuals, two vaccine doses achieved vaccine effectiveness of 66% (95% CI 63-69) against infection with the delta variant and 25% (21-29) against infection with the omicron variant, and 83% (74-89) against delta variant-associated hospitalisation and 75% (56-86) against omicron variant-associated hospitalisation. Booster vaccination with a third dose achieved vaccine effectiveness of 56% (53-58) against infection with the omicron variant and 94% (86-97) against omicron-associated hospitalisation, compared with unvaccinated adolescents. Vaccine effectiveness against infection for both variants after two doses waned over time, whereas vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation for both variants remained stable; both were increased after three doses.Among adolescents aged 12-17 years, vaccine effectiveness against confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection after two doses of BNT162b2 decreased over time and increased after a third dose. Boosted adolescents were also the most protected from hospitalisation compared with fully vaccinated, partly vaccinated, and unvaccinated adolescents. Therefore, the booster dose of BNT162b2 can help to reduce the burden on the health-care system and individual morbidity during an omicron wave.None.
8 citations
TL;DR: Having a good correlation with cardiac function, CXCL10/IP10 is a potential biomarker to predict LV dysfunction in MIS-C patients.
Abstract: Background: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of CXCL10/IP10 for left ventricular (LV) dysfunction in multisystemic inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C). Methods: This cross-sectional, longitudinal study included 36 patients with MIS-C. Patients were classified as follows: (1) patients presenting with Kawasaki-like features (group I = 11); (2) patients presenting with LV systolic dysfunction (group II = 9); and (3) other presentations (group III = 3). CXCL10/IP10 levels were measured upon admission and on days 3 and 7 of treatment. Results: Twenty patients were male and 16 were female. The median age of patients at diagnosis was 7.5 (1.5–17) years. All patients had a fever lasting for a median of 4 (2–7) days. Ten patients had LV systolic dysfunction. The duration of hospitalization was longer in group II. Lymphocyte and platelet counts were lower, whereas NT-pro-BNP, troponin-I, D-dimer, and CXCL10/IP10 levels were higher in group II. Baseline levels of CXCL10/IP10 were weakly negatively correlated with ejection fraction (r = −0.387, p = 0.022). Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis yielded a cutoff value of CXCL10/IP10 to discriminate patients with LV dysfunction was 1839 pg/mL with sensitivity 88% and specificity 68% (Area under curve (AUC) = 0.827, 95% CI 0.682–0.972, p = 0.003). Conclusion: Having a good correlation with cardiac function, CXCL10/IP10 is a potential biomarker to predict LV dysfunction in MIS-C patients.
5 citations
TL;DR: SARS-CoV-2-infected symptomatic patients often suffer from high fever and loss of appetite which are responsible for the deficit of fluids and of protein intake, and many patients admitted to the emergency room are hypovolemic and hypoproteinemic and often suffering from respiratory distress accompanied by ground glass opacities in the CT scan of the lungs.
Abstract: SARS-CoV-2-infected symptomatic patients often suffer from high fever and loss of appetite which are responsible for the deficit of fluids and of protein intake. Many patients admitted to the emergency room are, therefore, hypovolemic and hypoproteinemic and often suffer from respiratory distress accompanied by ground glass opacities in the CT scan of the lungs. Ischemic damage in the lung capillaries is responsible for the microscopic hallmark, diffuse alveolar damage (DAD) characterized by hyaline membrane formation, fluid invasion of the alveoli, and progressive arrest of blood flow in the pulmonary vessels. The consequences are progressive congestion, increase in lung weight, and progressive hypoxia (progressive severity of ARDS). Sequestration of blood in the lungs worsens hypovolemia and ischemia in different organs. This is most probably responsible for the recruitment of inflammatory cells into the ischemic peripheral tissues, the release of acute-phase mediators, and for the persistence of elevated serum levels of positive acute-phase markers and of hypoalbuminemia. Autopsy studies have been performed mostly in patients who died in the ICU after SARS-CoV-2 infection because of progressive acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In the death certification charts, after respiratory insufficiency, hypovolemic heart failure should be mentioned as the main cause of death.
5 citations
TL;DR: A systematic review of clinical features, laboratory parameters and therapeutics of multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children (MIS-C) from India is presented in this article .
Abstract: With wide clinical spectrum, multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children (MIS-C) is a relatively novel condition occurring weeks to months’ post SARS-CoV-2 infection. The aim was to systematically review data on clinical features, laboratory parameters and therapeutics of MIS-C from India. This systematic review was done as per the PRISMA guidelines, and quality assessment was done using NIH tool for case-series. A systematic search through databases yielded studies whose data was pooled to calculate the mean frequencies with standard deviation using GraphPad software. Screening of 2548 articles published till December, 2021, yielded 11 case-series. World Health Organization case definition was used widely. There was a slight preponderance of males (57%), median (IQR) age was 7 (6,7) years, 63% (n=305) required intensive care unit admissions, and mortality rate was 10% (n=261). Clinical features included fever, mucocutaneous features (72%), and gastrointestinal problems (62%) in majority. Widely used treatment was corticosteroids (76%) and intravenous immunoglobulin (62%) with other options depending on patient’s state. An increased level of inflammatory markers and derangement in other parameters corroborated with disease status. Kawasaki disease like features, not reported in many studies, ranged from 4-76% of patients. MIS-C presents with a wide spectrum clinical features, increased inflammatory markers and managed as per the disease course and presentation. Future studies monitoring the long-term effects of MIS-C are recommended.
4 citations
TL;DR: AKI, the need for RRT, pre-existing CKD and a history of kidney transplantation are associated with adverse outcomes in COVID-19, and these findings are presented using tables and forest plots.
Abstract: Background This umbrella review aims to consolidate evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses investigating the impact of the coronavirus disease−2019 (COVID-19) on kidney health, and the associations between kidney diseases and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients. Methods Five databases, namely, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Ovid Medline, were searched for meta-analyses and systematic reviews from January 1, 2020 to June 2, 2022. Two reviewers independently selected reviews, identified reviews for inclusion and extracted data. Disagreements were resolved by group discussions. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of all included reviews using ROBIS tool. A narrative synthesis was conducted. The characteristics and major findings of the included reviews are presented using tables and forest plots. The included meta-analyses were updated when necessary. The review protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021266300). Results A total of 103 reviews were identified. Using ROBIS, 30 reviews were rated as low risk of bias. Data from these 30 reviews were included in the narrative synthesis. Ten meta-analyses were updated by incorporating 119 newly available cohort studies. Hospitalized COVID-19 patients had a notable acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence of 27.17%. AKI was significantly associated with mortality (pooled OR: 5.24) and severe conditions in COVID-19 patients (OR: 14.94). The pooled prevalence of CKD in COVID-19 patients was 5.7%. Pre-existing CKD was associated with a higher risk of death (pooled OR: 2.21) and disease severity (pooled OR: 1.87). Kidney transplant recipients were susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection (incidence: 23 per 10,000 person-weeks) with a pooled mortality of 18%. Conclusion Kidney disease such as CKD or recipients of kidney transplants were at increased risk of contracting COVID-19. Persons with COVID-19 also had a notable AKI incidence. AKI, the need for RRT, pre-existing CKD and a history of kidney transplantation are associated with adverse outcomes in COVID-19. Systematic review registration www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021266300, identifier: CRD42021266300.
3 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate.
Abstract: Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate
22,227 citations
01 Jan 2014
TL;DR: The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) as discussed by the authors was developed to assess the quality of nonrandomised studies with its design, content and ease of use directed to the task of incorporating the quality assessments in the interpretation of meta-analytic results.
Abstract: Nonrandomised studies, including case-control and cohort studies, can be challenging to implement and conduct. Assessment of the quality of such studies is essential for a proper understanding of nonrandomised studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) is an ongoing collaboration between the Universities of Newcastle, Australia and Ottawa, Canada. It was developed to assess the quality of nonrandomised studies with its design, content and ease of use directed to the task of incorporating the quality assessments in the interpretation of meta-analytic results. A 'star system' has been developed in which a study is judged on three broad perspectives: the selection of the study groups; the comparability of the groups; and the ascertainment of either the exposure or outcome of interest for case-control or cohort studies respectively. The goal of this project is to develop an instrument providing an easy and convenient tool for quality assessment of nonrandomised studies to be used in a systematic review.
17,590 citations
Monash University1, University of Amsterdam2, University of Paris3, Bond University4, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio5, University of Ottawa6, American University of Beirut7, Oregon Health & Science University8, University of York9, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute10, University of Southern Denmark11, Johns Hopkins University12, Brigham and Women's Hospital13, Indiana University14, University of Bristol15, University College London16, University of Toronto17
TL;DR: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement as discussed by the authors was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found.
Abstract: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
16,613 citations
University of Bristol1, Harvard University2, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust3, Research Triangle Park4, University of Toronto5, University of Oxford6, University of Ottawa7, Paris Descartes University8, University of London9, University of York10, University of Birmingham11, University of Southern Denmark12, University of Liverpool13, University of East Anglia14, Loyola University Chicago15, University of Aberdeen16, Kaiser Permanente17, Baruch College18, McMaster University19, Cochrane Collaboration20, McGill University21, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute22, University of Louisville23, University of Melbourne24
TL;DR: Risk of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions is developed, a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units or clusters of individuals to comparison groups.
Abstract: Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units (individuals or clusters of individuals) to comparison groups. The tool will be particularly useful to those undertaking systematic reviews that include non-randomised studies.
8,028 citations
TL;DR: The GRADE process begins with asking an explicit question, including specification of all important outcomes, and provides explicit criteria for rating the quality of evidence that include study design, risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness, and magnitude of effect.
6,093 citations