Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 8: 638097, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1266664

ABSTRACT

It is not clear whether D-dimer can be an independent predictor of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality, and the cut-off of D-dimer for clinical use remains to be determined. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis is still necessary to illuminate the clinical significance of plasma D-dimer in COVID-19 mortality. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases until November 2020. STATA software was used for all the statistical analyses. The identifier of systematic review registration was PROSPERO CRD42020220927. A total of 66 studies involving 40,614 COVID-19 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Pooled data showed that patients in high D-dimer group had poor prognosis than those in low D-dimer group [OR = 4.52, 95% CI = (3.61, 5.67), P < 0.001; HR = 2.81, 95% CI = (1.85, 4.27), P < 0.001]. Sensitivity analysis, pooled data based on different effect models and the Duval and Tweedie trim-and-fill method did not change the conclusions. Subgroup analyses stratified by different countries, cutoffs, sample size, study design, and analysis of OR/HR still keep consistent conclusions. D-dimer was identified as an independent predictor for COVID-19 mortality. A series of values including 0.5 µg/ml, 1 µg/ml, and 2 µg/ml could be determined as cutoff of D-dimer for clinic use. Measurement and monitoring of D-dimer might assist clinicians to take immediate medical actions and predict the prognosis of COVID-19.

2.
Pol Arch Intern Med ; 130(5): 400-406, 2020 05 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-622201

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The ongoing worldwide pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID­19) has posed a huge threat to global public health. However, the issue as to whether routine blood tests could be used to monitor and predict the severity and prognosis of COVID­19 has not been comprehensively investigated so far. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to provide an overview of the association of markers in the routine blood test with the severity of COVID­19. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases were searched to identify studies reporting data on markers in the routine blood test and the severity of COVID­19, published until March 20, 2020. The STATA software was used for meta­analysis. RESULTS: A total of 15 studies with 3090 patients with COVID­19 were included in this analysis. Patients in the nonsevere group, compared with those in the severe group, had lower counts of white blood cells (weighted mean difference [WMD], -0.85 [×109/l]; 95% CI, -1.54 to -0.16; P = 0.02) and neutrophils (WMD, -1.57 [×109/l]; 95% CI, -2.6 to -0.54; P = 0.003), greater counts of lymphocytes (WMD, 0.29 [×109/l]; 95% CI, 0.22-0.36; P <0.001) and platelets (WMD, 19.05 [×109/l]; 95% CI, 3.04-35.06; P = 0.02), and a lower neutrophil­to­lymphocyte (NLR) ratio (WMD, -2.48; 95% CI, -3.81 to -1.15; P <0.001). There was no difference in the monocyte count (WMD, 0.01 [×109/l]; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.03; P = 0.029) between these 2 groups. Sensitivity analysis and meta­analysis based on standard mean difference did not change the conclusions regarding neutrophils, lymphocytes, and NLR, but yielded inconsistent results for white blood cells and platelets. CONCLUSIONS: Severe patients had more neutrophils, higher NLR level, and fewer lymphocytes than non-severe patients with COVID-19. Measurement of these markers might assist clinicians to monitor and predict the severity and prognosis of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Adult , COVID-19 , Humans , Leukocyte Count , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Platelet Count , Prognosis , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL