Background: The present study aimed to determine the global prevalence of anosmia and dysgeusia in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and to assess their association with severity and mortality of COVID-19. Moreover, this study aimed to discuss the possible pathobiological mechanisms of anosmia and dysgeusia in COVID-19. Methods: Available articles from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and preprint databases (MedRxiv, BioRxiv, and Researchsquare) were searched on November 10th, 2020. Data on the characteristics of the study (anosmia, dysgeusia, and COVID-19) were extracted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Newcastle–Ottawa scale was used to assess research quality. Moreover, the pooled prevalence of anosmia and dysgeusia were calculated, and the association between anosmia and dysgeusia in presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was assessed using the Z test. Results: Out of 32,142 COVID-19 patients from 107 studies, anosmia was reported in 12,038 patients with a prevalence of 38.2% (95% CI: 36.5%, 47.2%); whereas, dysgeusia was reported in 11,337 patients out of 30,901 COVID-19 patients from 101 studies, with prevalence of 36.6% (95% CI: 35.2%, 45.2%), worldwide. Furthermore, the prevalence of anosmia was 10.2-fold higher (OR: 10.21; 95% CI: 6.53, 15.96, p < 0.001) and that of dysgeusia was 8.6-fold higher (OR: 8.61; 95% CI: 5.26, 14.11, p < 0.001) in COVID-19 patients compared to those with other respiratory infections or COVID-19 like illness. To date, no study has assessed the association of anosmia and dysgeusia with severity and mortality of COVID-19. Conclusion: Anosmia and dysgeusia are prevalent in COVID-19 patients compared to those with the other non-COVID-19 respiratory infections. Several possible mechanisms have been hypothesized; however, future studies are warranted to elucidate the definitive mechanisms of anosmia and dysgeusia in COVID-19. Protocol registration: PROSPERO CRD42020223204.

Background: This study aimed to determine the cumulative prevalence of prolonged gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, lack of appetite, abdominal pain, and dysgeusia, in survivors of both mild and severe COVID-19 worldwide and to discuss the potential pathogenesis.   Methods: Three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched for relevant articles up to January 30, 2021. Data on study characteristics, clinical characteristics during follow-up, the number of patients with prolonged GI symptoms, and total number of COVID-19 survivors were retrieved according to PRISMA guidelines. The quality of eligible studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The pooled prevalence of specific prolonged GI symptoms was calculated and the association between COVID-19 severity and the occurrence of prolonged GI symptoms was assessed if appropriate.   Results: The global prevalence of prolonged nausea was 3.23% (95% CI: 0.54%–16.53%) among 527 COVID-19 survivors. Vomiting persisted in 93 of 2,238 COVID-19 survivors (3.19%, 95% CI: 1.62%–6.17%) and prolonged diarrhea was found in 34 of 1,073 survivors (4.12%, 95% CI: 1.07%–14.64%). A total of 156 patients among 2,238 COVID-19 survivors (4.41%, 95% CI: 1.91%–9.94%) complained of persistent decreased or loss of appetite. The cumulative prevalence of prolonged abdominal pain was 1.68% (95% CI: 0.84%–3.32%), whereas persistent dysgeusia was identified in 130 cases among 1,887 COVID-19 survivors (7.04%, 95% CI: 5.96%–8.30%). Data was insufficient to assess the relationship between COVID-19 severity and the occurrence of all prolonged GI symptoms.   Conclusion: Persistent GI symptoms among COVID-19 survivors after discharge or recovery raises a concern regarding the long-term impact of the COVID-19 infection on the quality of life of the survivors. Despite several potential explanations proposed, studies that aim to follow patients after recovery from COVID-19 and determine the pathogenesis of the prolonged symptoms of COVID-19 survivors are warranted.   PROSPERO registration: CRD42021239187.

The study sought to determine the prevalence of persistent long COVID symptoms such as anxiety, depression, dizziness, chest pain, sleep difficulty, palpitations, weight loss, and hair loss among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors worldwide and to discuss the potential pathogeneses. Potential studies were searched in three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) as of January 30, 2021. Data on study characteristics, patient characteristics during the follow-up, the number of patients with persistent long COVID symptoms and total COVID-19 survivors were collected according to PRISMA guidelines. To assess the quality of studies, the Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used. The estimated prevalence of each long COVID symptom and the association between COVID-19 severity and the occurrence of prolonged symptoms was assessed, if appropriate. The global prevalence of prolonged anxiety was 15.76% (95%CI: 6.36%, 25.15%). Chest pain persisted in 10.36% (239/3,224) of COVID-19 patients (95%CI: 4.92%, 15.80%). Prolonged depression was found in 24 of 548 COVID-19 survivors with an estimated prevalence of 4.32% (95%CI: 2.62%, 6.03%) and dizziness was presented in 4.83% (118/2,219, 95%CI: 1.50%, 8.16%) after recovery. Hair loss was complained by 527 of 2,251 recovered patients (cumulative prevalence of 24.76%, 95%CI: 19.60%, 29.91%), while weight loss was identified in 37 cases among 452 COVID-19 survivors (8.19%, 95%CI: 5.66%, 10.71%). Prolonged palpitation was experienced by 19.38% (211/1,926) survivors with 95%CI: 2.40%, 41.16%. Sleep difficulty was found in 541 of 2,622 COVID-19 survivors (17.87%, 95%CI: 7.55%, 28.20%). The association between COVID-19 severity and the occurrence of persistent long COVID symptoms was not analyzed due to the lack of data. In conclusion, persistent psychological symptoms are frequently reported among COVID-19 survivors. Follow-up studies with a longer duration and larger population are warranted to assess the extent of prolonged symptoms and the quality of life of COVID-19 survivors. Despite various potential pathogeneses that have been hypothesized, a definitive mechanism is yet to be addressed.

Background: In this study, we aimed to determine the global prevalence, chronological order of symptom appearance, and mortality rates with regard to hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to discuss possible pathogeneses of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in individuals with the disease. Methods: We searched the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for relevant articles published up to November 8, 2020. Data regarding study characteristics, hemorrhagic stroke, ischemic stroke, and COVID-19 were retrieved in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of the eligible studies. The pooled prevalence and mortality rate of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke were calculated. Results: The pooled estimate of prevalence of hemorrhagic stroke was 0.46% (95% CI 0.40%–0.53%; I2=89.81%) among 67,155 COVID-19 patients and that of ischemic stroke was 1.11% (95% CI 1.03%–1.22%; I2=94.07%) among 58,104 COVID-19 patients. Ischemic stroke was more predominant (incidence: 71.58%) than hemorrhagic stroke (incidence: 28.42%) in COVID-19 patients who experienced a stroke. In COVID-19 patients who experienced a stroke, hospital admission with respiratory symptoms was more commonly reported than that with neurological symptoms (20.83% for hemorrhagic stroke and 5.51% for ischemic stroke versus 6.94% for hemorrhagic stroke and 5.33% for ischemic stroke, respectively). The pooled mortality rate of COVID-19 patients who experienced a hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke was 44.72% (95% CI 36.73%–52.98%) and 36.23% (95% CI 30.63%–42.24%), respectively. Conclusions: Although the occurrence of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke is low, the mortality rates of both stroke types in patients with COVID-19 are concerning, and therefore, despite several potential pathogeneses that have been proposed, studies aimed at definitively elucidating the mechanisms of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in individuals with COVID-19 are warranted. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020224470 (04/12/20)

Background: This study was conducted to determine the prevalence of headache in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to assess its association as a predictor for COVID-19. This study also aimed to discuss the possible pathogenesis of headache in COVID-19. Methods: Available articles from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched as of September 2nd, 2020. Data on characteristics of the study, headache and COVID-19 were extracted following the PRISMA guidelines. Biases were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The cumulative prevalence of headache was calculated for the general population (i.e. adults and children). The pooled odd ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) was calculated using the Z test to assess the association between headache and the presence of COVID-19 cases. Results: We included 104,751 COVID-19 cases from 78 eligible studies to calculate the global prevalence of headache in COVID-19 and 17 studies were included to calculate the association of headache and COVID-19. The cumulative prevalence of headache in COVID-19 was 25.2% (26,464 out of 104,751 cases). Headache was found to be more prevalent, approximately by two-fold, in COVID-19 patients than in non-COVID-19 patients (other respiratory viral infections), OR: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.94, 2.5 with p=0.04. Conclusion: Headache is common among COVID-19 patients and seems to be more common in COVID-19 patients compared to those with the non-COVID-19 viral infection. No definitive mechanisms on how headache  emerges in COVID-19 patients but several possible hypotheses have been proposed. However, extensive studies are warranted to elucidate the mechanisms. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020210332 (28/09/2020)

Background: This study was conducted to determine the prevalence of headache in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to assess its association as a predictor for COVID-19. This study also aimed to discuss the possible pathogenesis of headache in COVID-19. Methods: Available articles from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched as of September 2nd, 2020. Data on characteristics of the study, headache and COVID-19 were extracted following the PRISMA guidelines. Biases were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The cumulative prevalence of headache was calculated for the general population (i.e. adults and children). The pooled odd ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) was calculated using the Z test to assess the association between headache and the presence of COVID-19 cases. Results: We included 104,751 COVID-19 cases from 78 eligible studies to calculate the global prevalence of headache in COVID-19 and 17 studies were included to calculate the association of headache and COVID-19. The cumulative prevalence of headache in COVID-19 was 25.2% (26,464 out of 104,751 cases). Headache was found to be more prevalent, approximately by two-fold, in COVID-19 patients than in non-COVID-19 patients with symptoms of other respiratory viral infections, OR: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.94, 2.5 with p=0.04. Conclusion: Headache is common among COVID-19 patients and seems to be more common in COVID-19 patients compared to those with the non-COVID-19 viral infection. No definitive mechanisms on how headache  emerges in COVID-19 patients but several possible hypotheses have been proposed. However, extensive studies are warranted to elucidate the mechanisms. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020210332 (28/09/2020)

Background: Cytokine storm has been widely known to contribute to the development of the critical condition in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and studies had been conducted to assess the potential aspect of cytokine storm elimination by performing therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE). However, contradictory findings were observed. The objective of this study was to assess the association between TPE and the reduction of mortality of critically ill COVID-19 patients. Methods: A meta-analysis was conducted by collecting data from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Data on the mortality rate of critically ill COVID-19 patients treated with TPE plus standard of care and that of patients treated with standard of care alone were analyzed using a Z test. Results: We included a total of four papers assessing the association between TPE and the risk of mortality among critically ill COVID-19 patients. Our findings suggested that critically ill COVID-19 patients treated with TPE had lower risk of mortality compared to those without TPE treatment. Conclusion: Our study has identified the potential benefits of TPE in reducing the risk of mortality among critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Background: Convalescent plasma (CCP) has been used for treating some infectious diseases; however, the efficacy of CCP in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains controversial. The aim of this research was to assess the efficacy of CCP as an adjunctive treatment in COVID-19 patients. Methods: Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane and MedRix were searched for potentially relevant articles. All included papers were assessed for the quality using modified jadad scale and Newcaste-ottawa scale for randomized controlled trial (RCT) and non – RCT, respectively. We used a Q test and Egger test to assess the heterogeneity and publication bias among studies, respectively. Mortality rates between patients treated with standard treatment and standard treatment with CCP were compared using a Z test. Results: A total of 12 papers consisting of three cross-sectional studies, one prospective study, five retrospective studies, and two RCT studies were included in our analysis. Of them, a total of 1,937 patients treated with CCP and 3,405 patients without CCP were involved.. The risk of mortality was 1.92-fold higher in patients without CCP compared to patients treated with CCP (OR: 1.92; 95%CI: 1.33, 2.77; p=0.0005). In severe COVID-19 sub-group analysis, we found that patients without the CCP had a 1.32 times higher risk of mortality than those treated with the CCP (OR: 1.32; 95%CI: 1.09, 1.60; p=0.0040). Conclusions: CCP, as adjunctive therapy, reduces the mortality rate among COVID-19 patients.