Background: The unpredictability of the progression of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be attributed to the low precision of the tools used to predict the prognosis of this disease. Objective: To identify the predictors associated with poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Methods: Relevant articles from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science were searched and extracted as of April 5, 2020. Data of interest were collected and evaluated for their compatibility for the meta-analysis. Cumulative calculations to determine the correlation and effect estimates were performed using the Z test. Results: In total, 19 papers recording 1,934 mild and 1,644 severe cases of COVID-19 were included. Based on the initial evaluation, 62 potential risk factors were identified for the meta-analysis. Several comorbidities, including chronic respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension were observed more frequent among patients with severe COVID-19 than with the mild ones. Compared to the mild form, severe COVID-19 was associated with symptoms such as dyspnea, anorexia, fatigue, increased respiratory rate, and high systolic blood pressure. Lower levels of lymphocytes and hemoglobin; elevated levels of leukocytes, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, blood creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, high-sensitivity troponin, creatine kinase, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin 6, D-dimer, ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase, and procalcitonin; and a high erythrocyte sedimentation rate were also associated with severe COVID-19. Conclusion: More than 30 risk factors are associated with a higher risk of severe COVID-19. These may serve as useful baseline parameters in the development of prediction tools for COVID-19 prognosis.

ObjectiveTo investigate the no reflow risk factors after percutaneous coronary intervention in ST elevation myocardial infarction patients.MethodSample size, mean ± standard deviation (SD) or frequencies (percent) of normal and no reflow groups were extracted from each study.ResultsOf 27 retrospective and prospective studies, we found that increasing risks of no reflow were associated with advanced age, male, family history of coronary artery disease, smoking, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, delayed reperfusion, killip class ≥2, elevated blood glucose, increased creatinine, elevated creatine kinase (CK), higher heart rate, decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), collateral flow ≤1, longer lesion length, multivessel disease, reference luminal diameter, initial thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow, and high thrombus burden. Moreover, initial TIMI flow ≤1 and high thrombus burden had the greater impact on no reflow (OR95%CI = 3.83 [2.77–5.29], p < 0.0001 and 3.69 [2.39–5.68], p < 0.0001, respectively).ConclusionOur meta-analysis reveals that initial TIMI flow ≤1 and high thrombus burden are the most impacted no reflow risk factors.

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: The unpredictability of the progression of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be attributed to the low precision of the tools used to predict the prognosis of this disease. Objective: To identify the predictors associated with poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Methods: Relevant articles from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science were searched as of April 5, 2020. The quality of the included papers was appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Data of interest were collected and evaluated for their compatibility for the meta-analysis. Cumulative calculations to determine the correlation and effect estimates were performed using the Z test. Results: In total, 19 papers recording 1,934 mild and 1,644 severe cases of COVID-19 were included. Based on the initial evaluation, 62 potential risk factors were identified for the meta-analysis. Several comorbidities, including chronic respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension were observed more frequent among patients with severe COVID-19 than with the mild ones. Compared to the mild form, severe COVID-19 was associated with symptoms such as dyspnea, anorexia, fatigue, increased respiratory rate, and high systolic blood pressure. Lower levels of lymphocytes and hemoglobin; elevated levels of leukocytes, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, blood creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, high-sensitivity troponin, creatine kinase, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin 6, D-dimer, ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase, and procalcitonin; and a high erythrocyte sedimentation rate were also associated with severe COVID-19. Conclusion: More than 30 risk factors are associated with a higher risk of severe COVID-19. These may serve as useful baseline parameters in the development of prediction tools for COVID-19 prognosis.

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.

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)

Countries worldwide have deployed mass COVID-19 vaccination drives, but there are people who are hesitant to receive the vaccine. Studies assessing the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy are inconclusive. This study aimed to assess the global prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy and determine the potential factors associated with such hesitancy. We performed an organized search for relevant articles in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Extraction of the required information was performed for each study. A single-arm meta-analysis was performed to determine the global prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy; the potential factors related to vaccine hesitancy were analyzed using a Z-test. A total of 56 articles were included in our analysis. We found that the global prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy was 25%. Being a woman, being a 50-year-old or younger, being single, being unemployed, living in a household with five or more individuals, having an educational attainment lower than an undergraduate degree, having a non-healthcare-related job and considering COVID-19 vaccines to be unsafe were associated with a higher risk of vaccination hesitancy. In contrast, living with children at home, maintaining physical distancing norms, having ever tested for COVID-19, and having a history of influenza vaccination in the past few years were associated with a lower risk of hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccination. Our study provides valuable information on COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy, and we recommend special interventions in the sub-populations with increased risk to reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

No abstract