Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Cardiol Young ; 31(2): 233-240, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-919404

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the literature to determine if both paediatric and adult patients diagnosed with congenital heart disease (CHD) are at a higher risk of poor outcomes if they have the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), compared to those without CHD. METHODS: A systematic review was executed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. To identify articles related to COVID-19 and CHD, an extensive literature search was performed on EMBASE, Medline, Scopus, and Global Health databases using keywords and MeSH terms. RESULTS: A total of 12 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis in this systematic review. Two themes were identified for data extraction: evidence supporting higher risks in CHD patients and evidence against higher risks in CHD patients. After combining the data, there were 99 patients with CHDs out of which 12 required admissions to ICU. CONCLUSION: This systematic review suggests that CHD may increase the risk of poor outcomes for those with COVID-19, but also highlights the necessity for more research with larger sample sizes in order to make a more justified conclusion, as the majority of papers that were analysed were case series and case reports. Future research should aim to quantify the risks if possible whilst accounting for various confounding factors such as age and treatment history.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/physiopathology , Heart Defects, Congenital/complications , Heart Defects, Congenital/physiopathology , Adult , COVID-19/mortality , Child , Heart Defects, Congenital/mortality , Humans
4.
J Card Surg ; 35(10): 2679-2687, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-680252

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the literature evidence behind using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in COVID-19 patients in a systematic review manner. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was conducted on Global Health Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases using keywords and MeSH terms to identify articles pertaining to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A narrative synthesis was then undertaken to identify the key themes. RESULTS: A total of 25 articles met the inclusion criteria of this systematic review. Three main themes were identified following the data extraction: (a) evidence against/inconclusive regarding ECMO for COVID-19, (b) evidence supporting ECMO for COVID-19, and finally (c) VV-ECMO and VA-ECMO. After combining the data, there were 3428 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and 95 ECMO-associated deaths (19.83%). CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the paucity of evidence and the need for further data to consolidate the efficacy of ECMO in improving patient outcomes. Although ECMO has been shown to be beneficial in a selected group of patients, the recuperative effects of ECMO remain inconclusive. We must ensure that risk-benefit analysis for each candidate is conducted thoroughly so that patients that have increased probability of survival can benefit from this scarce resource.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL