Dataset Information

Outcomes Associated With Intensive Care and Organ Support Among Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Accurate accounting of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) critical care outcomes has important implications for health care delivery.

Research question

We aimed to determine critical care and organ support outcomes of intensive care unit (ICU) COVID-19 patients and whether they varied depending on the completeness of study follow-up or admission time period.

Study design and methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of reports describing ICU, mechanical ventilation (MV), renal replacement therapy (RRT), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) mortality. A search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases.We included English language observational studies of COVID-19 patients, reporting ICU admission, MV, and ICU case fatality, published from December 1, 2019 to December 31, 2020. We excluded reports of less than 5 ICU patients and pediatric populations. Study characteristics, patient demographics, and outcomes were extracted from each article. Subgroup meta-analyses were performed based on the admission end date and the completeness of data.

Results

Of 6,778 generated articles, 145 were retained for inclusion (n = 60,357 patients). Case fatality rates across all studies were 34.0% (95% CI = 30.7%, 37.5%, P < 0.001) for ICU deaths, 47.9% (95% CI = 41.6%, 54.2%, P < 0.001) for MV deaths, 58.7% (95% CI = 50.0%, 67.2%, P < 0.001) for RRT deaths, and 43.3% (95% CI = 31.4%, 55.4%, P < 0.001) for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation deaths. There was no statistically significant difference in ICU and organ support outcomes between studies with complete follow-up versus studies without complete follow-up. Case fatality rates for ICU, MV, and RRT deaths were significantly higher in studies with patients admitted before April 31st 2020.

Interpretation

Coronavirus disease 2019 critical care outcomes have significantly improved since the start of the pandemic. Intensive care unit outcomes should be evaluated contextually (study quality, data completeness, and time) for the most accurate reporting and to effectively guide mortality predictions.

SUBMITTER: Leazer S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9384097 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Outcomes Associated With Intensive Care and Organ Support Among Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Leazer Sahar S Collen Jacob J Alcover Karl K Tompkins Erin E Ambardar Shiva S Allard Rhonda J RJ Foster Brian B McNutt Ryan R Leon Matthew M Haynes Zachary Z Bascome Makala M Williams Matthias M Bunin Jessica J O'Malley Patrick G PG Moores Lisa K LK Chung Kevin K KK

Military medicine 20230301 3-4

<h4>Background</h4>Accurate accounting of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) critical care outcomes has important implications for health care delivery.<h4>Research question</h4>We aimed to determine critical care and organ support outcomes of intensive care unit (ICU) COVID-19 patients and whether they varied depending on the completeness of study follow-up or admission time period.<h4>Study design and methods</h4>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of reports describing ICU, me ...[more]

PMID: 35639913

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMajor organ complications have been reported in patients hospitalised for COVID-19; most studies lacked controls.ObjectiveExamine major organ damage postdischarge among adults hospitalised for COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 controls.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library from 1 January 2020 to 19 May 2021.Study eligibility criteriaEnglish language studies of adults discharged from hospital for COVID-19; reporting major organ damage. Single review of abstracts; independent dual review of full text.Study appraisal and synthesis methodsStudy quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Appraisal Checklist for Cohort Studies. Outcome data were not pooled due to heterogeneity in populations, study designs and outcome assessment methods; findings are narratively synthesised.ResultsOf 124 studies in a full evidence report, 9 included non-COVID controls and are described here. Four of the nine (three USA, one UK) used large administrative databases. Four of the remaining five studies enrolled <600 COVID-19 patients. Mean or median age ranged from 49 to 70 years with 46%-94% male and 48%-78% White race; 10%-40% had been in intensive care units. Follow-up ranged from 4 weeks to 22 weeks postdischarge. Four used hospitalised controls, three non-hospitalised controls and two were unclear. Studies used various definitions of, and methods to assess, major organ damage outcomes. While the magnitude of effect differed across studies, incident cardiac, pulmonary, liver, acute and chronic kidney, stroke, diabetes, and coagulation disorders were consistently greater in adults hospitalised for COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19 controls.LimitationsApplicability to subgroups (age, gender, COVID-19 severity, treatment, vaccination status) and non-hospitalised patients is unknown.Conclusions and implications of key findingsPostacute COVID-19 major organ damage is common and likely higher than controls. However, there is substantial uncertainty. More consistent reporting of clinical outcomes and pre-COVID health status along with careful selection of control groups are needed to address evidence gaps.Prospero registration numberCRD42020204788.

Project description:BackgroundAwake prone positioning (APP) has been widely used in non-intubated COVID-19 patients during the pandemic. However, high-quality evidence to support its use in severe COVID-19 patients in an intensive care unit (ICU) is inadequate. Therefore, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of APP for intubation requirements and other important outcomes in this patient population.MethodsWe searched for potentially relevant articles in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database from inception to May 25, 2022. Studies focusing on COVID-19 adults in ICU who received APP compared to controls were included. The primary outcome was the intubation requirement. Secondary outcomes were mortality, ICU stay, and adverse events. Study quality was independently assessed, and we also conducted subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias to explore the potential influence factors.ResultsTen randomized controlled trials with 1,686 patients were eligible. The quality of the included studies was low to moderate. Overall, the intubation rate was 35.2% in the included patients. The mean daily APP duration ranged from <6 to 9 h, with poor adherence to APP protocols. When pooling, APP significantly reduced intubation requirement (risk ratio [RR] 0.84; 95%CI, 0.74-0.95; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.007). Subgroup analyses confirmed the reduced intubation rates in patients who were older (≥60 years), obese, came from a high mortality risk population (>20%), received HFNC/NIV, had lower SpO2/FiO2 (<150 mmHg), or undergone longer duration of APP (≥8 h). However, APP showed no beneficial effect on mortality (RR 0.92 [95% CI 0.77-1.10; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.37] and length of ICU stay (mean difference = -0.58 days; 95% CI, -2.49 to 1.32; I 2 = 63%; P = 0.55).ConclusionAPP significantly reduced intubation requirements in ICU patients with COVID-19 pneumonia without affecting the outcomes of mortality and ICU stay. Further studies with better APP protocol adherence will be needed to define the subgroup of patients most likely to benefit from this strategy.

Project description:Identification of high-risk patients admitted to intensive care with COVID-19 may inform management strategies. The objective of this meta-analysis was to determine factors associated with mortality among adults with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care by searching databases for studies published between 1 January 2020 and 6 December 2020. Observational studies of COVID-19 adults admitted to critical care were included. Studies of mixed cohorts and intensive care cohorts restricted to a specific patient sub-group were excluded. Dichotomous variables were reported with pooled OR and 95%CI, and continuous variables with pooled standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95%CI. Fifty-eight studies (44,305 patients) were included in the review. Increasing age (SMD 0.65, 95%CI 0.53-0.77); smoking (OR 1.40, 95%CI 1.03-1.90); hypertension (OR 1.54, 95%CI 1.29-1.85); diabetes (OR 1.41, 95%CI 1.22-1.63); cardiovascular disease (OR 1.91, 95%CI 1.52-2.38); respiratory disease (OR 1.75, 95%CI 1.33-2.31); renal disease (OR 2.39, 95%CI 1.68-3.40); and malignancy (OR 1.81, 95%CI 1.30-2.52) were associated with mortality. A higher sequential organ failure assessment score (SMD 0.86, 95%CI 0.63-1.10) and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation-2 score (SMD 0.89, 95%CI 0.65-1.13); a lower PaO2 :FI O2 (SMD -0.44, 95%CI -0.62 to -0.26) and the need for mechanical ventilation at admission (OR 2.53, 95%CI 1.90-3.37) were associated with mortality. Higher white cell counts (SMD 0.37, 95%CI 0.22-0.51); neutrophils (SMD 0.42, 95%CI 0.19-0.64); D-dimers (SMD 0.56, 95%CI 0.43-0.69); ferritin (SMD 0.32, 95%CI 0.19-0.45); lower platelet (SMD -0.22, 95%CI -0.35 to -0.10); and lymphocyte counts (SMD -0.37, 95%CI -0.54 to -0.19) were all associated with mortality. In conclusion, increasing age, pre-existing comorbidities, severity of illness based on validated scoring systems, and the host response to the disease were associated with mortality; while male sex and increasing BMI were not. These factors have prognostic relevance for patients admitted to intensive care with COVID-19.

Project description:Objectives: Examining the cumulative evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), evaluating the use of pharmacological agents for the treatment of COVID-19 infections in patients with critical illness. Data Sources: Databases Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane. Study Selection: Inclusion criteria were RCTs that enrolled patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection who are critically ill. Only RCTs that examined therapeutic agents against one another or no intervention, placebo, or standard of care, were included. Data Extraction: Pairs of reviewers extracted data independently. Outcomes of interest included the overall reported mortality defined as either the ICU mortality, hospital mortality, mortality within 28 days or mortality within 90 days. Data Synthesis: A total of 40 studies (11,613 patients) evaluated 50 therapeutic intervention arms divided into five main therapy categories; steroids, antiviral medications, immunomodulators, plasma therapies [intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), convalescent plasma and/or, therapeutic plasma exchange], and therapeutic anticoagulation. Immunomodulators was the only group with possible mortality benefit, risk ratio (RR) 0.83 (95% CI 0.73; 0.95), with nonsignificant heterogeneity (I 2 = 8%, p=0.36). In contrast, the other therapy groups showed no significant impact on mortality, as indicated by their respective pooled RRs: steroids [RR 0.91 (95% CI 0.82; 1.01), I 2 = 31%], antiviral medications [RR 1.11 (95% CI 0.82; 1.49), I 2 = 57%], plasma therapies [RR 0.77 (95% CI 0.58; 1.01), I 2 = 36%], and anticoagulation [RR 1.06 (95% CI 0.95; 1.18), I 2 = 0%]. Conclusions: This meta-analysis highlights both the heterogeneity and a lack of benefit from therapies evaluated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of the RCTs were developed based on limited observational data. Future RCTs investigating pharmaceutical interventions in critically ill patients during pandemics need to be designed based on better evidence.

Project description:This study aimed to provide systematic evidence for the association between multiorgan dysfunction and COVID-19 development. Several online databases were searched for articles published until May 13, 2020. Two investigators independently selected trials, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of individual trials. Single-arm meta-analysis was performed to summarize the clinical features of confirmed COVID-19 patients. Fixed effects meta-analysis was performed for clinically relevant parameters that were closely related to the patients' various organ functions. A total of 73 studies, including 171,108 patients, were included in this analysis. The overall incidence of severe COVID-19 and mortality were 24% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20%-28%) and 2% (95% CI, 1%-3%), respectively. Patients with hypertension (odds ratio [OR] = 2.40; 95% CI, 2.08-2.78), cardiovascular disease (CVD) (OR = 3.54; 95% CI, 2.68-4.68), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (OR=3.70; 95% CI, 2.93-4.68), chronic liver disease (CLD) (OR=1.48; 95% CI, 1.09-2.01), chronic kidney disease (CKD) (OR = 1.84; 95% CI, 1.47-2.30), chronic cerebrovascular diseases (OR = 2.53; 95% CI, 1.84-3.49) and chronic gastrointestinal (GI) disease (OR = 2.13; 95% CI, 1.12-4.05) were more likely to develop severe COVID-19. Increased levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), creatine kinase (CK), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI), myoglobin, creatinine, urea, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and total bilirubin were highly associated with severe COVID-19. The incidence of acute organ injuries, including acute cardiac injury (ACI); (OR = 11.87; 95% CI, 7.64-18.46), acute kidney injury (AKI); (OR=10.25; 95% CI, 7.60-13.84), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); (OR=27.66; 95% CI, 18.58-41.18), and acute cerebrovascular diseases (OR=9.22; 95% CI, 1.61-52.72) was more common in patients with severe COVID-19 than in patients with non-severe COVID-19. Patients with a history of organ dysfunction are more susceptible to severe conditions. COVID-19 can aggravate an acute multiorgan injury.

Dataset Information

Outcomes Associated With Intensive Care and Organ Support Among Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background

Research question

Study design and methods

Results

Interpretation

Publications

Outcomes Associated With Intensive Care and Organ Support Among Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets