ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Evidence recommends that vitamin D might be a crucial supportive agent for the immune system, mainly in cytokine response regulation against COVID-19. Hence, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis in order to maximise the use of everything that exists about the role of vitamin D in the COVID-19. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science up to December 18, 2020. Studies focused on the role of vitamin D in confirmed COVID-19 patients were entered into the systematic review. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies containing 11 901 participants entered into the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis indicated that 41% of COVID-19 patients were suffering from vitamin D deficiency (95% CI, 29%-55%), and in 42% of patients, levels of vitamin D were insufficient (95% CI, 24%-63%). The serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration was 20.3 ng/mL among all COVID-19 patients (95% CI, 12.1-19.8). The odds of getting infected with SARS-CoV-2 are 3.3 times higher among individuals with vitamin D deficiency (95% CI, 2.5-4.3). The chance of developing severe COVID-19 is about five times higher in patients with vitamin D deficiency (OR: 5.1, 95% CI, 2.6-10.3). There is no significant association between vitamin D status and higher mortality rates (OR: 1.6, 95% CI, 0.5-4.4). CONCLUSION: This study found that most of the COVID-19 patients were suffering from vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency. Also, there is about three times higher chance of getting infected with SARS-CoV-2 among vitamin-D-deficient individuals and about five times higher probability of developing the severe disease in vitamin-D-deficient patients. Vitamin D deficiency showed no significant association with mortality rates in this population.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vitamin D Deficiency , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Vitamin D , Vitamin D Deficiency/epidemiology , VitaminsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to examine the role of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a systematic search in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CochraneLibrary, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and medRxiv pre-print databases using available MeSH terms for COVID-19 and hydroxychloroquine. Data from all studies that focused on the effectiveness of HCQ with or without the addition of azithromycin (AZM) in confirmed COVID-19 patients, which were published up to 12 September 2020, were collated for analysis using CMA v.2.2.064. RESULTS: Our systematic review retrieved 41 studies. Among these, 37 studies including 45,913 participants fulfilled the criteria for subsequent meta-analysis. The data showed no significant difference in treatment efficacy between the HCQ and control groups (RR: 1.02, 95% CI, 0.81-1.27). Combination of HCQ with AZM also did not lead to improved treatment outcomes (RR: 1.26, 95% CI, 0.91-1.74). Furthermore, the mortality difference was not significant, neither in HCQ treatment group (RR: 0.86, 95% CI, 0.71-1.03) nor in HCQ plus AZM treatment group (RR: 1.28, 95% CI, 0.76-2.14) in comparison to controls. Meta-regression analysis showed that age was the factor that significantly affected mortality (P<0.00001). CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis found that there was no clinical benefit of using either HCQ by itself or in combination with AZM for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Hence, it may be prudent for clinicians and researchers to focus on other therapeutic options that may show greater promise in this disease.
Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , COVID-19/prevention & control , Drug Therapy, Combination , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/statistics & numerical data , Mortality , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: High rate of cardiovascular disease (CVD) have been reported among patients with novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Meanwhile there were controversies among different studies about CVD burden in COVID-19 patients. Hence, we aimed to study CVD burden among COVID-19 patients, using a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We have systematically searched databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science as well as medRxiv pre-print database. Hand searched was also conducted in journal websites and Google Scholar. Meta-analyses were carried out for Odds Ratio (OR) of mortality and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission for different CVDs. We have also performed a descriptive meta-analysis on different CVDs. RESULTS: Fifty-six studies entered into meta-analysis for ICU admission and mortality outcome and 198 papers for descriptive outcomes, including 159,698 COVID-19 patients. Results of meta-analysis indicated that acute cardiac injury, (OR: 13.29, 95% CI 7.35-24.03), hypertension (OR: 2.60, 95% CI 2.11-3.19), heart Failure (OR: 6.72, 95% CI 3.34-13.52), arrhythmia (OR: 2.75, 95% CI 1.43-5.25), coronary artery disease (OR: 3.78, 95% CI 2.42-5.90), and cardiovascular disease (OR: 2.61, 95% CI 1.89-3.62) were significantly associated with mortality. Arrhythmia (OR: 7.03, 95% CI 2.79-17.69), acute cardiac injury (OR: 15.58, 95% CI 5.15-47.12), coronary heart disease (OR: 2.61, 95% CI 1.09-6.26), cardiovascular disease (OR: 3.11, 95% CI 1.59-6.09), and hypertension (OR: 1.95, 95% CI 1.41-2.68) were also significantly associated with ICU admission in COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSION: Findings of this study revealed a high burden of CVDs among COVID-19 patients, which was significantly associated with mortality and ICU admission. Proper management of CVD patients with COVID-19 and monitoring COVID-19 patients for acute cardiac conditions is highly recommended to prevent mortality and critical situations.