Viral Load Difference between Symptomatic and Asymptomatic COVID-19 Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the possible difference in the SARS-CoV-2 viral load between asymptomatic and symptomatic COVID-19 patients. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed in abstracting data and assessing validity. We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar for all investigations in the English language, reporting data on the threshold cycle (Ct) from real-time RT-PCR assays for the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), envelope (E) and nucleocapsid (N) SARS-CoV-2 genes in asymptomatic and symptomatic COVID-19 patients. Results: Overall, 703 COVID-19 patients (553 symptomatic and 150 asymptomatic) were analyzed. Five investigations reported the mean age of patients, evidencing that asymptomatic patients were younger than symptomatic patients (34.0 vs. 40.3 years, respectively). Pooled data regarding the levels of expression of the RdRp gene revealed no significant difference between symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects. Similarly, no differences were observed comparing the mean Ct values for the E and N genes. Based on real-time RT-PCR data, no differences exist in the viral load between symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 subjects considering Ct values for RdRp, E and N genes' expression. Asymptomatic subjects may represent a reservoir of the infection and significantly contribute to the maintenance of the pandemic.

Prognostic Role of Metabolic Syndrome in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence and prognostic implications of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in patients infected by the SARS-CoV-2 remain unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence and mortality risk in COVID-19 patients with MetS. METHODS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed in abstracting data and assessing validity. We searched MEDLINE and Scopus to locate every article published up to 1 September 2021, reporting data on MetS among COVID-19 patients. The pooled prevalence of MetS was calculated using a random effects model and presented using the related 95% confidence interval (CI), while the mortality risk was estimated using the Mantel-Haenszel random effects models with odds ratio (OR) and related 95% CI. Statistical heterogeneity was measured using the Higgins I2 statistic. RESULTS: Six studies, enrolling 209.569 COVID-19 patients [mean age 57.2 years, 114.188 males (54.4%)] met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. The pooled prevalence of dyslipidaemia was 20.5% of cases (95% CI: 6.7-47.8%, p = 0.03), with high heterogeneity (I2 = 98.9%). Pre-existing MetS was significantly associated with higher risk of short-term mortality (OR: 2.30, 95% CI: 1.52-3.45, p < 0.001), with high heterogeneity (I2 = 89.4%). Meta-regression showed a direct correlation with male gender (p = 0.03), hypertension (p < 0.001), DM (p = 0.01) and hyperlipidaemia (p = 0.04), but no effect when considering age (p = 0.75) and chronic pulmonary disease (p = 0.86) as moderators. CONCLUSIONS: MetS represents a major comorbidity in about 20% of COVID-19 patients and it is associated with a 230% increased risk of short-term mortality.