Tag: meta-analysis

Global prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome among long COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract:

Background: Chronic fatigue syndrome is a persistent and debilitating disorder. According to several studies, chronic fatigue syndrome has been identified among recovered COVID-19 patients as the most common symptom of long COVID. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis study was to obtain the prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome in long COVID cases.

Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we analysed reported results of studies that assessed the occurrence of chronic fatigue syndrome among COVID-19 patients four weeks after the onset of symptoms. The study selection was commenced by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Science Direct, Scopus, Embase, and Google scholar using the keywords of Chronic fatigue syndrome, COVID-19, and post-COVID-19 syndrome. The searches were without a lower time limit and until April 2022. Heterogeneity of studies was assessed using the I2 index, and a random effects model was used for analysis. Data analysis was performed within the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (version 2).

Results: The pooled prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome four weeks after the onset of COVID-19 symptoms, in 52 studies with a sample size of 127,117, was 45.2% (95% CI: 34.1-56.9%). Meta-regression analysis in examining the effects of the two factors of sample size, and year of study on the changes in the overall prevalence, showed that with increasing sample size, and year of study, the prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome among long COVID patients (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: Our results show that the overall prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome as a long COVID symptom is 45.2%. Chronic fatigue after infection with COVID-19 can negatively affect personal and social lives. Given such significant negative consequences caused by the syndrome, it is recommended that health policymakers allocate funds to reduce the adverse effects of this syndrome, by creating programs to support long COVID patients.

Source: Salari N, Khodayari Y, Hosseinian-Far A, Zarei H, Rasoulpoor S, Akbari H, Mohammadi M. Global prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome among long COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Biopsychosoc Med. 2022 Oct 23;16(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s13030-022-00250-5. PMID: 36274177; PMCID: PMC9589726. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9589726/ (Full text)

Use of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing to Evaluate Long COVID-19 Symptoms in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Abstract

Importance: Reduced exercise capacity is commonly reported among individuals with COVID-19 symptoms more than 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection (long COVID-19 [LC]). Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is the criterion standard to measure exercise capacity and identify patterns of exertional intolerance.

Objectives: To estimate the difference in exercise capacity among individuals with and without LC symptoms and characterize physiological patterns of limitations to elucidate possible mechanisms of LC.

Data sources: A search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, preprint servers, conference abstracts, and cited references was performed on December 20, 2021, and again on May 24, 2022. A preprint search of medrxiv.org, biorxiv.org, and researchsquare.com was performed on June 9, 2022.

Study selection: Studies of adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection more than 3 months earlier that included CPET-measured peak oxygen consumption (V̇o2) were screened independently by 2 blinded reviewers; 72 (2%) were selected for full-text review, and 35 (1%) met the inclusion criteria. An additional 3 studies were identified from preprint servers.

Data extraction and synthesis: Data extraction was performed by 2 independent reviewers according to the PRISMA reporting guideline. Data were pooled using random-effects models.

Main outcomes and measures: Difference in peak V̇o2 (in mL/kg/min) among individuals with and without persistent COVID-19 symptoms more than 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Results: A total of 38 studies were identified that performed CPET on 2160 individuals 3 to 18 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection, including 1228 with symptoms consistent with LC. Most studies were case series of individuals with LC or cross-sectional assessments within posthospitalization cohorts. Based on a meta-analysis of 9 studies including 464 individuals with LC symptoms and 359 without symptoms, the mean peak V̇o2 was -4.9 (95% CI, -6.4 to -3.4) mL/kg/min among those with symptoms with a low degree of certainty. Deconditioning and peripheral limitations (abnormal oxygen extraction) were common, but dysfunctional breathing and chronotropic incompetence were also described. The existing literature was limited by small sample sizes, selection bias, confounding, and varying symptom definitions and CPET interpretations, resulting in high risk of bias and heterogeneity.

Conclusions and relevance: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis study suggest that exercise capacity was reduced more than 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection among individuals with symptoms consistent with LC compared with individuals without LC symptoms, with low confidence. Potential mechanisms for exertional intolerance other than deconditioning include altered autonomic function (eg, chronotropic incompetence, dysfunctional breathing), endothelial dysfunction, and muscular or mitochondrial pathology.

Source: Durstenfeld MS, Sun K, Tahir P, Peluso MJ, Deeks SG, Aras MA, Grandis DJ, Long CS, Beatty A, Hsue PY. Use of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing to Evaluate Long COVID-19 Symptoms in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Oct 3;5(10):e2236057. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.36057. PMID: 36223120. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2797203 (Full text)

Chinese herbal medicine for the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract:

Objectives: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) in treating chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS).

Methods: Nine electronic databases were searched from inception to May 2022. Two reviewers screened studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias independently. The meta-analysis was performed using the Stata 12.0 software.

Results: Eighty-four RCTs that explored the efficacy of 69 kinds of Chinese herbal formulas with various dosage forms (decoction, granule, oral liquid, pill, ointment, capsule, and herbal porridge), involving 6,944 participants were identified. This meta-analysis showed that the application of CHM for CFS can decrease Fatigue Scale scores (WMD: –1.77; 95%CI: –1.96 to –1.57; p < 0.001), Fatigue Assessment Instrument scores (WMD: –15.75; 95%CI: –26.89 to –4.61; p < 0.01), Self-Rating Scale of mental state scores (WMD: –9.72; 95%CI:–12.26 to –7.18; p < 0.001), Self-Rating Anxiety Scale scores (WMD: –7.07; 95%CI: –9.96 to –4.19; p < 0.001), Self-Rating Depression Scale scores (WMD: –5.45; 95%CI: –6.82 to –4.08; p < 0.001), and clinical symptom scores (WMD: –5.37; 95%CI: –6.13 to –4.60; p < 0.001) and improve IGA (WMD: 0.30; 95%CI: 0.20–0.41; p < 0.001), IGG (WMD: 1.74; 95%CI: 0.87–2.62; p < 0.001), IGM (WMD: 0.21; 95%CI: 0.14–0.29; p < 0.001), and the effective rate (RR = 1.41; 95%CI: 1.33–1.49; p < 0.001). However, natural killer cell levels did not change significantly. The included studies did not report any serious adverse events. In addition, the methodology quality of the included RCTs was generally not high.

Conclusion: Our study showed that CHM seems to be effective and safe in the treatment of CFS. However, given the poor quality of reports from these studies, the results should be interpreted cautiously. More international multi-centered, double-blinded, well-designed, randomized controlled trials are needed in future research.

Source: Zhang, Jin, Wei, Jin, Xie, Pan and Shen. Chinese herbal medicine for the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front. Pharmacol., 29 September 2022. Sec. Ethnopharmacology https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.958005 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2022.958005/full (Full text)

Long COVID in children and adolescents

Abstract:

Purpose of review: Although acute COVID-19 has been milder in children and young people compared with adults, there is a concern that they may suffer persistent symptoms. There is a need to define the clinical phenotype, determine those most at risk, the natural course of the condition and evaluate preventive and therapeutic strategies for both mental health and physical symptoms.

Recent findings: More recent studies with control groups reported a lower prevalence of persistent symptoms in children and young people exposed to SARS-CoV-2. A systematic review and meta-analysis found that the frequency of the majority of reported persistent symptoms is similar in SARS-CoV-2 positive cases and controls. Children and young people infected with SARS-COV-2 had small but significant increases in persisting cognitive difficulties, headache and loss of smell. Factors associated with persisting, impairing symptoms include increased number of symptoms at the time of testing, female sex, older age, worse self-rated physical and mental health, and feelings of loneliness preinfection.

Summary: This review highlights the importance of a control group in studies following SARS-CoV-2 infection, the need for case definitions and research to understand the outcomes of long COVID in children and young people.

Source: Stephenson T, Shafran R, Ladhani SN. Long COVID in children and adolescents. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2022 Sep 12. doi: 10.1097/QCO.0000000000000854. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 36094094.  https://journals.lww.com/co-infectiousdiseases/Fulltext/2022/10000/Long_COVID_in_children_and_adolescents.14.aspx (Full text)

Gastrointestinal manifestations of long COVID: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract:

Background: Prolonged symptoms after COVID-19 are an important concern due to the large numbers affected by the pandemic.

Objectives: To ascertain the frequency of gastrointestinal (GI) manifestations as part of long GI COVID.

Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting GI manifestations in long COVID was performed.

Data sources and methods: Electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science) were searched till 21 December 2021 to identify studies reporting frequency of GI symptoms in long COVID. We included studies reporting overall GI manifestations or individual GI symptoms as part of long COVID. We excluded pediatric studies and those not providing relevant information. We calculated the pooled frequency of various symptoms in all patients with COVID-19 and also in those with long COVID using the inverse variance approach. All analysis was done using R version 4.1.1 using packages ‘meta’ and ‘metafor’.

Results: A total of 50 studies were included. The frequencies of GI symptoms were 0.12 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.06-0.22, I 2 = 99%] and 0.22 (95% CI, 0.10-0.41, I 2 = 97%) in patients with COVID-19 and those with long COVID, respectively. The frequencies of abdominal pain, nausea/vomiting, loss of appetite, and loss of taste were 0.14 (95% CI, 0.04-0.38, I 2 = 96%), 0.06 (95% CI, 0.03-0.11, I 2 = 98%), 0.20 (95% CI, 0.08-0.43, I 2 = 98%), and 0.17 (95% CI, 0.10-0.27, I 2 = 95%), respectively, after COVID-19. The frequencies of diarrhea, dyspepsia, and irritable bowel syndrome were 0.10 (95% CI, 0.04-0.23, I 2 = 98%), 0.20 (95% CI, 0.06-0.50, I 2 = 97%), and 0.17 (95% CI, 0.06-0.37, I 2 = 96%), respectively.

Conclusion: GI symptoms in patients were seen in 12% after COVID-19 and 22% as part of long COVID. Loss of appetite, dyspepsia, irritable bowel syndrome, loss of taste, and abdominal pain were the five most common GI symptoms of long COVID. Significant heterogeneity and small number of studies for some of the analyses are limitations of the systematic review.

Source: Choudhury A, Tariq R, Jena A, Vesely EK, Singh S, Khanna S, Sharma V. Gastrointestinal manifestations of long COVID: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2022 Aug 19;15:17562848221118403. doi: 10.1177/17562848221118403. PMID: 36004306; PMCID: PMC9393939. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9393939/ (Full text)

Predicting the efficacy of variant-modified COVID-19 vaccine boosters

Abstract:

As a result of the emergence and circulation of antigenically distinct SARS-CoV-2 variants, a number of variant-modified COVID-19 vaccines have been developed. Here we perform a meta-analysis of the available data on neutralisation titres from clinical studies comparing booster vaccination with either the current ancestral-based vaccines or variant-modified vaccines. We then use this to predict the relative efficacies of these booster vaccines under different scenarios.

Source: David S Khoury, Steffen S Docken, Kanta Subbarao, Stephen Kent, Miles Philip Davenport, Deborah Cromer. Predicting the efficacy of variant-modified COVID-19 vaccine boosters. medRxiv 2022.08.25.22279237; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.08.25.22279237 (Full article available as PDF file)

Clinical overlap between fibromyalgia and myalgic encephalomyelitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract:

Myalgic encephalomyelitis is an illness characterized by profound malaise after mental or physical effort occurring in patients already suffering from constant fatigue. On the other hand, widespread pain and widespread allodynia are the core fibromyalgia clinical features. There is controversy on these two syndromes alikeness. Through the years, different diagnostic and/or classification criteria have been put forward to appraise both fibromyalgia and myalgic encephalomyelitis. The epidemiology of these two illnesses, and their overlap, may vary accordingly to the used definition. The most recent Wolfe et al. 2016 fibromyalgia diagnostic criteria incorporates three myalgic encephalomyelitis features including fatigue, waking unrefreshed and dyscognition. The objective of this meta-analysis was to define the clinical overlap between fibromyalgia and myalgic encephalomyelitis based on a systematic literature review.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, Lilacs, and Cochrane data bases were searched on January 25, 2021 linking the medical subject heading “Fibromyalgia” to the following terms “chronic fatigue syndrome”, “myalgic encephalomyelitis” and “systemic exertion intolerance disease”. Our review included all original articles in which the clinical overlap between fibromyalgia and myalgic encephalomyelitis could be quantified based on recognized diagnostic or classification criteria. Articles scrutiny and selection followed the PRISMA guidelines. Each study quality was assessed according to GRADE recommendations. The global clinical overlap was calculated using a fixed effect model with inverse variance-weighted average method.

Results: Twenty one publications were included in the meta-analysis. Reviewed studies were highly dissimilar in their design, objectives, sample size, diagnostic criteria, and/or outcomes yielding a 98% heterogeneity index. Nevertheless, the clinical overlap between fibromyalgia and myalgic encephalomyelitis was a well defined outcome that could be reliably calculated despite the high heterogeneity value. All reviewed publications had moderate GRADE evidence level. Most evaluated articles used the old 1990 Wolfe et al. fibromyalgia diagnostic criteria. Myalgic encephalomyelitis and fibromyalgia diagnoses overlapped in 47.3% (95% CI: 45.97-48.63) of the reported cases.

Conclusion: This meta-analysis found prominent clinical overlap between fibromyalgia and myalgic encephalomyelitis. It seems likely that this concordance would be even higher when using the most recent Wolfe et al. 2016 fibromyalgia diagnostic criteria.

Source: Ramírez-Morales R, Bermúdez-Benítez E, Martínez-Martínez LA, Martínez-Lavín M. Clinical overlap between fibromyalgia and myalgic encephalomyelitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Autoimmun Rev. 2022 Jun 8:103129. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2022.103129. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35690247. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35690247/

Global Prevalence of Post COVID-19 Condition or Long COVID: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Abstract:

Introduction: This study aims to examine the worldwide prevalence of post COVID-19 condition, through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, and iSearch were searched on July 5, 2021 with verification extending to March 13, 2022. Using a random effects framework with DerSimonian-Laird estimator, we meta-analyzed post COVID-19 condition prevalence at 28+ days from infection.

Results: 50 studies were included, and 41 were meta-analyzed. Global estimated pooled prevalence of post COVID-19 condition was 0.43 (95% CI: 0.39,0.46). Hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients have estimates of 0.54 (95% CI: 0.44,0.63) and 0.34 (95% CI: 0.25,0.46), respectively. Regional prevalence estimates were Asia- 0.51 (95% CI: 0.37,0.65), Europe- 0.44 (95% CI: 0.32,0.56), and North America- 0.31 (95% CI: 0.21,0.43). Global prevalence for 30, 60, 90, and 120 days after infection were estimated to be 0.37 (95% CI: 0.26,0.49), 0.25 (95% CI: 0.15,0.38), 0.32 (95% CI: 0.14,0.57) and 0.49 (95% CI: 0.40,0.59), respectively. Fatigue was the most common symptom reported with a prevalence of 0.23 (95% CI: 0.17,0.30), followed by memory problems (0.14 [95% CI: 0.10,0.19]).

Discussion: This study finds post COVID-19 condition prevalence is substantial; the health effects of COVID-19 appear to be prolonged and can exert stress on the healthcare system.

Source: Chen C, Haupert SR, Zimmermann L, Shi X, Fritsche LG, Mukherjee B. Global Prevalence of Post COVID-19 Condition or Long COVID: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review. J Infect Dis. 2022 Apr 16:jiac136. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiac136. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35429399. https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/infdis/jiac136/6569364?login=false (Full text available as PDF file)

A systematic review and meta-analysis of Long COVID symptoms

Abstract:

Background Ongoing symptoms or the development of new symptoms following a SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis has caused a complex clinical problem known as “:Long COVID”: (LC). This has introduced further pressure on global healthcare systems as there appears to be a need for ongoing clinical management of these patients. LC personifies heterogeneous symptoms at varying frequencies. The most complex symptoms appear to be driven by the neurology and neuropsychiatry spheres.

Methods A systematic protocol was developed, peer reviewed and published in PROSPERO. The systematic review included publications from the 1st of December 2019-30th June 2021 published in English. Multiple electronic databases were used. The dataset has been analysed using a random-effects model and a subgroup analysis based on geographical location. Prevalence and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were established based on the data identified.

Results Of the 302 studies, 49 met the inclusion criteria, although 36 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The 36 studies had a collective sample size of 11598 LC patients. 18 of the 36 studies were designed as cohorts and the remainder were cross-sectional. Symptoms of mental health, gastrointestinal, cardiopulmonary, neurological, and pain were reported.

Conclusions The quality that differentiates this meta-analysis is that they are cohort and cross-sectional studies with follow-up. It is evident that there is limited knowledge available of LC and current clinical management strategies may be suboptimal as a result. Clinical practice improvements will require more comprehensive clinical research, enabling effective evidence-based approaches to better support patients.

Source: Arun Natarajan, Ashish Shetty, Gayathri Delanerolle, Yutian Zeng, Yingzhe Zhang, Vanessa Raymont, Shanaya Rathod, Sam Halabi, Kathryn Elliot, Peter Phiri, Jian Qing Shi. A systematic review and meta-analysis of Long COVID symptoms. medRxiv 2022.03.08.22272091; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.08.22272091 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.03.08.22272091v1.full-text (Full text)

Prevalence of post-acute COVID-19 syndrome symptoms at different follow-up periods: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract:

Background: Post-acute COVID-19 Syndrome is now recognized as a complex systemic disease that is associated with substantial morbidity.

Objectives: To estimate the prevalence of persistent symptoms and signs at least 12 weeks after acute COVID-19 at different follow-up periods.

Data sources: Searches were conducted up to October 2021 in Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, and PubMed.

Study eligibility criteria: Articles in English that reported the prevalence of persistent symptoms among individuals with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and included at least 50 patients with a follow-up of at least 12 weeks after acute illness.

Methods: Random-effect meta-analysis was performed to produce pooled prevalence for each symptom at 4 different follow-up time intervals. Between-studies heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic and was explored via meta-regression, considering several a priori study level variables. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for prevalence studies and comparative studies, respectively.

Results: After screening 3209 studies, a total of 63 studies were eligible, with a total COVID-19 population of 257,348. The most commonly reported symptoms were fatigue, dyspnea, sleep disorder and concentration difficulty (32%, 25%, 24%, and 22% respectively at 3-<6 months follow-up), effort intolerance, fatigue, sleep disorder and dyspnea (45%, 36%, 29% and 25% respectively at 6-<9 months follow-up), fatigue (37%) and dyspnea (21%) at 9-<12 months and fatigue, dyspnea, sleep disorder, myalgia (41%, 31%, 30%, and 22% respectively at >12 months follow-up). There was substantial between-studies heterogeneity for all reported symptoms prevalence. Meta-regressions identified statistically significant effect modifiers: world region, male gender, diabetes mellitus, disease severity and overall study quality score. Five of six studies including a comparator group consisting of COVID-19 negative cases observed significant adjusted associations between COVID-19 and several long-term symptoms.

Conclusions: This systematic review found that a large proportion of patients experience PACS 3 to 12 months after recovery from the acute phase of COVD-19. However, available studies of PACS are highly heterogeneous. Future studies need to have appropriate comparator groups, standardized symptoms definitions and measurements and longer follow-up.

Source: Alkodaymi MS, Omrani OA, Fawzy NA, Shaar BA, Almamlouk R, Riaz M, Obeidat M, Obeidat Y, Gerberi D, Taha RM, Kashour Z, Kashour T, Berbari EF, Alkattan K, Tleyjeh IM. Prevalence of post-acute COVID-19 syndrome symptoms at different follow-up periods: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2022 Feb 3:S1198-743X(22)00038-6. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2022.01.014. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35124265; PMCID: PMC8812092. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8812092/ (Full text)