Correlation between the variables collected at admission and progression to severe cases during hospitalization among patients with COVID‐19 in Chongqing

Duan, Jun; Wang, Xiaohui; Chi, Jing; Chen, Hong; Bai, Linfu; Hu, Qianfang; Han, Xiaoli; Hu, Wenhui; Zhu, Linxiao; Wang, Xue; You, Li; Chenmei, Zhou; Mou, Huaming; Yan, Xiaofeng; Guo, Shuliang

doi:10.1002/jmv.26082

Cited by 63 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, 84 studies were included in the final analyses. Of them, 60 studies reported on a total of 5487 subjects with severe COVID-19 and 9670 subjects with mild COVID-19 [ 6 , 8 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 ,…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The heterogeneity among studies was significant (I 2 : 84.3%, p < 0.001) and was not reduced by the exclusion of one study at a time. In contrast, no difference was found in 23 studies [6,8,25,26,31,32,35,36,38,40,41,[44][45][46]51,54,63,64,67,68,73,76,81] reporting aPTT values between 1018 subjects with severe COVID-19 In contrast, no difference was found in 23 studies [6,8,25,26,31,32,35,36,38,40,41,[44][45][46]51,54,63,64,67,68,73,76,81] reporting aPTT values between 1018 subjects with severe COVID-19 and 3976 subjects with mild disease (SMD: 0.04; 95%CI: −0.17, 0.25, p = 0.701; I 2 : 86.1%, p < 0.001, Figure 2). and 3976 subjects with mild disease (SMD: 0.04...…”

Section: Study Group 1 (Severe Covid-19 Vs Mild Covid-19)mentioning

confidence: 86%

“…The heterogeneity among studies was significant (I 2 : 95.8%, p < 0.001) and was not reduced by the exclusion of one study at a time. Forty-nine studies [6,8,[24][25][26][27][28][30][31][32][33][34][35][36]38,[41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53]55,[57][58][59]61,[63][64][65][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74]76,77,80,81,87] showed higher D-Dimer levels in 5024 subjects with severe COVID-19 than in 8052 subjects with mild COVID-19 (SMD: 0.67; 95%CI: 0.52, 0.82, p < 0.001,…”

Section: Study Group 1 (Severe Covid-19 Vs Mild Covid-19)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…,28,29,31-33,36,37,39,41,44,45,49-53,56,58-64,66-68,73-76,78,79,87]. The heterogeneity among studies was significant (I 2 : 95.5%, p < 0.001) and was not reduced after excluding one study at a time.A total of 18 studies[28,30,[32][33][34][35]38,40,[44][45][46][47]51,57,59,61,71,81] showed significantly higher fibrinogen values in 469 subjects with severe as compared to 1434 subjects with mild COVID-19 (SMD: 1.84; 95%CI: 1.21, 2.47, p < 0.001,…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Hemostatic Changes in Patients with COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis with Meta-Regressions

Minno

Calcaterra

Lupoli

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Complications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) include coagulopathy. We performed a meta-analysis on the association of COVID-19 severity with changes in hemostatic parameters. Methods: Data on prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), D-Dimer, platelets (PLT), or fibrinogen in severe versus mild COVID-19 patients, and/or in non-survivors to COVID-19 versus survivors were systematically searched. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated. Results: Sixty studies comparing 5487 subjects with severe and 9670 subjects with mild COVID-19 documented higher PT (SMD: 0.41; 95%CI: 0.21, 0.60), D-Dimer (SMD: 0.67; 95%CI: 0.52, 0.82), and fibrinogen values (SMD: 1.84; 95%CI: 1.21, 2.47), with lower PLT count (SMD: −0.74; 95%CI: −1.01, −0.47) among severe patients. Twenty-five studies on 1511 COVID-19 non-survivors and 6287 survivors showed higher PT (SMD: 0.67; 95%CI: 0.39, 0.96) and D-Dimer values (SMD: 3.88; 95%CI: 2.70, 5.07), with lower PLT count (SMD: −0.60, 95%CI: −0.82, −0.38) among non-survivors. Regression models showed that C-reactive protein values were directly correlated with the difference in PT and fibrinogen. Conclusions: Significant hemostatic changes are associated with COVID-19 severity. Considering the risk of fatal complications with residual chronic disability and poor long-term outcomes, further studies should investigate the prognostic role of hemostatic parameters in COVID-19 patients.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Group 1 (Severe Covid-19 Vs Mild Covid-19)mentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Study Group 1 (Severe Covid-19 Vs Mild Covid-19)mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Hemostatic Changes in Patients with COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis with Meta-Regressions

Minno

Calcaterra

Lupoli

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Covid-19 severity levels can be categorized as mild, moderate, severe, and critical conditions ( Figure 1 ) [ 28 , 29 ]. Mild disease is defined as patients without dyspnea, without clinical evidence of respiratory distress, no pneumonia on imaging, and blood oxygen saturation maintained above 93% under resting conditions [ 30 , 31 ]. Fever (<39.1 °C) and cough are seen frequently, even in mild disease.…”

Section: Criteria For Determining Severitymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Telemedicine Approach to Covid-19 Assessment and Triage

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Covid-19 is a new highly contagious RNA viral disease that has caused a global pandemic. Human-to-human transmission occurs primarily through oral and nasal droplets and possibly through the airborne route. The disease may be asymptomatic or the course may be mild with upper respiratory symptoms, moderate with non-life-threatening pneumonia, or severe with pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome. The severe form is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. While patients who are unstable and in acute distress need immediate in-person attention, many patients can be evaluated at home by telemedicine or videoconferencing. The more benign manifestations of Covid-19 may be managed from home to maintain quarantine, thus avoiding spread to other patients and health care workers. This document provides an overview of the clinical presentation of Covid-19, emphasizing telemedicine strategies for assessment and triage of patients. Advantages of the virtual visit during this time of social distancing are highlighted.

show abstract

Accuracy of routine laboratory tests to predict mortality and deterioration to severe or critical COVID-19 in people with SARS-CoV-2

De Rop,

Bos,

Stegeman

et al. 2024

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Identifying patients with COVID‐19 disease who will deteriorate can be useful to assess whether they should receive intensive care, or whether they can be treated in a less intensive way or through outpatient care. In clinical care, routine laboratory markers, such as C‐reactive protein, are used to assess a person's health status. Objectives To assess the accuracy of routine blood‐based laboratory tests to predict mortality and deterioration to severe or critical (from mild or moderate) COVID‐19 in people with SARS‐CoV‐2. Search methods On 25 August 2022, we searched the Cochrane COVID‐19 Study Register, encompassing searches of various databases such as MEDLINE via PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, medRxiv, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We did not apply any language restrictions. Selection criteria We included studies of all designs that produced estimates of prognostic accuracy in participants who presented to outpatient services, or were admitted to general hospital wards with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, and studies that were based on serum banks of samples from people. All routine blood‐based laboratory tests performed during the first encounter were included. We included any reference standard used to define deterioration to severe or critical disease that was provided by the authors. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently extracted data from each included study, and independently assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Prognostic Accuracy Studies tool. As studies reported different thresholds for the same test, we used the Hierarchical Summary Receiver Operator Curve model for meta‐analyses to estimate summary curves in SAS 9.4. We estimated the sensitivity at points on the SROC curves that corresponded to the median and interquartile range boundaries of specificities in the included studies. Direct and indirect comparisons were exclusively conducted for biomarkers with an estimated sensitivity and 95% CI of ≥ 50% at a specificity of ≥ 50%. The relative diagnostic odds ratio was calculated as a summary of the relative accuracy of these biomarkers. Main results We identified a total of 64 studies, including 71,170 participants, of which 8169 participants died, and 4031 participants deteriorated to severe/critical condition. The studies assessed 53 different laboratory tests. For some tests, both increases and decreases relative to the normal range were included. There was important heterogeneity between tests and their cut‐off values. None of the included studies had a low risk of bias or low concern for applicability for all domains. None of the tests included in this review demonstrated high sensitivity or specificity, or both. The five tests with summary sensitivity and specificity above 50% were: C‐reactive protein increase, neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio increase, lymphocyte...

show abstract

Correlation between the variables collected at admission and progression to severe cases during hospitalization among patients with COVID‐19 in Chongqing

Abstract: Funding information Chongqing Science and Technology Bureau "new crown pneumonia epidemic emergency science and technology special" the fourth batch of projects; Chongqing Education Board "new coronavirus infection and prevention" emergency scientific research project

Cited by 63 publications

References 16 publications

Hemostatic Changes in Patients with COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis with Meta-Regressions

Hemostatic Changes in Patients with COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis with Meta-Regressions

A Telemedicine Approach to Covid-19 Assessment and Triage

Accuracy of routine laboratory tests to predict mortality and deterioration to severe or critical COVID-19 in people with SARS-CoV-2

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About