1.
Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for coronavirus disease 2019 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Zhai K, Xu X, Zhang P, Wei S, Li J, Wu X, Gao B, Zhang Y, Li Y
Perfusion. 2022;:2676591221104302
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Although the application of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is accumulating, the feasibility and safety of this therapy remain controversial. We aimed to evaluate the effect of VV-ECMO in the treatment of these patients. METHODS A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform databases through November 2021. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the included studies were screened, and meta-analysis was performed by R software (version 4.0.2). RESULTS Forty-two studies including 2037 COVID-19 patients supported with VV-ECMO due to ARDS were identified. The pooled analysis revealed that 30-, 60-, and 90-day mortality among patients were respectively 46% (95% CI 37%-57%, I(2) = 66%), 46% (95% CI 30%-70%, I(2) = 93%), and 49% (95% CI 43%-58%, I(2) = 52%), and the pooled incidence rate of in-hospital mortality, major bleeding, hemorrhagic stroke, thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, and renal replacement therapy were respectively 35%, 39%, 11%, 40%, 15%, 21%, and 44%. CONCLUSION Although COVID-19 patients may have a higher risk of bleeding, hemorrhagic stroke, and acute kidney injury during ECMO therapy, the survival rate was more than half of the cases. Our data may support the application of VV-ECMO in COVID-19 patients.
2.
Identification of Parameters Representative of Immune Dysfunction in Patients with Severe and Fatal COVID-19 Infection: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Qin R, He L, Yang Z, Jia N, Chen R, Xie J, Fu W, Chen H, Lin X, Huang R, et al
Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology. 2022;:1-33
Abstract
Abnormal immunological indicators associated with disease severity and mortality in patients with COVID-19 have been reported in several observational studies. However, there are marked heterogeneities in patient characteristics and research methodologies in these studies. We aimed to provide an updated synthesis of the association between immune-related indicators and COVID-19 prognosis. We conducted an electronic search of PubMed, Scopus, Ovid, Willey, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and CNKI for studies reporting immunological and/or immune-related parameters, including hematological, inflammatory, coagulation, and biochemical variables, tested on hospital admission of COVID-19 patients with different severities and outcomes. A total of 145 studies were included in the current meta-analysis, with 26 immunological, 11 hematological, 5 inflammatory, 4 coagulation, and 10 biochemical variables reported. Of them, levels of cytokines, including IL-1β, IL-1Ra, IL-2R, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-18, TNF-α, IFN-γ, IgA, IgG, and CD4(+) T/CD8(+) T cell ratio, WBC, neutrophil, platelet, ESR, CRP, ferritin, SAA, D-dimer, FIB, and LDH were significantly increased in severely ill patients or non-survivors. Moreover, non-severely ill patients or survivors presented significantly higher counts of lymphocytes, monocytes, lymphocyte/monocyte ratio, eosinophils, CD3(+) T,CD4(+)T and CD8(+)T cells, B cells, and NK cells. The currently updated meta-analysis primarily identified a hypercytokinemia profile with the severity and mortality of COVID-19 containing IL-1β, IL-1Ra, IL-2R, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-18, TNF-α, and IFN-γ. Impaired innate and adaptive immune responses, reflected by decreased eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, B cells, NK cells, T cells, and their subtype CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells, and augmented inflammation, coagulation dysfunction, and nonpulmonary organ injury, were marked features of patients with poor prognosis. Therefore, parameters of immune response dysfunction combined with inflammatory, coagulated, or nonpulmonary organ injury indicators may be more sensitive to predict severe patients and those non-survivors.
3.
SARS-CoV-2 Is a Culprit for Some, but Not All Acute Ischemic Strokes: A Report from the Multinational COVID-19 Stroke Study Group
Shahjouei S, Anyaehie M, Koza E, Tsivgoulis G, Naderi S, Mowla A, Avula V, Vafaei Sadr A, Chaudhary D, Farahmand G, et al
Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2021;10(5)
Abstract
BACKGROUND SARS-CoV-2 infected patients are suggested to have a higher incidence of thrombotic events such as acute ischemic strokes (AIS). This study aimed at exploring vascular comorbidity patterns among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with subsequent stroke. We also investigated whether the comorbidities and their frequencies under each subclass of TOAST criteria were similar to the AIS population studies prior to the pandemic. METHODS This is a report from the Multinational COVID-19 Stroke Study Group. We present an original dataset of SASR-CoV-2 infected patients who had a subsequent stroke recorded through our multicenter prospective study. In addition, we built a dataset of previously reported patients by conducting a systematic literature review. We demonstrated distinct subgroups by clinical risk scoring models and unsupervised machine learning algorithms, including hierarchical K-Means (ML-K) and Spectral clustering (ML-S). RESULTS This study included 323 AIS patients from 71 centers in 17 countries from the original dataset and 145 patients reported in the literature. The unsupervised clustering methods suggest a distinct cohort of patients (ML-K: 36% and ML-S: 42%) with no or few comorbidities. These patients were more than 6 years younger than other subgroups and more likely were men (ML-K: 59% and ML-S: 60%). The majority of patients in this subgroup suffered from an embolic-appearing stroke on imaging (ML-K: 83% and ML-S: 85%) and had about 50% risk of large vessel occlusions (ML-K: 50% and ML-S: 53%). In addition, there were two cohorts of patients with large-artery atherosclerosis (ML-K: 30% and ML-S: 43% of patients) and cardioembolic strokes (ML-K: 34% and ML-S: 15%) with consistent comorbidity and imaging patterns. Binominal logistic regression demonstrated that ischemic heart disease (odds ratio (OR), 4.9; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.6-14.7), atrial fibrillation (OR, 14.0; 95% CI, 4.8-40.8), and active neoplasm (OR, 7.1; 95% CI, 1.4-36.2) were associated with cardioembolic stroke. CONCLUSIONS Although a cohort of young and healthy men with cardioembolic and large vessel occlusions can be distinguished using both clinical sub-grouping and unsupervised clustering, stroke in other patients may be explained based on the existing comorbidities.