Background: Laboratory testing is commonly performed in patients with COVID-19. Each of the laboratory parameters has potential value for risk stratification and prediction of COVID-19 outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the difference between these parameters in severe and nonsevere disease and to provide the optimal cutoff value for predicting severe disease. Method: We performed a systematic literature search through electronic databases. The variables of interest were serum procalcitonin, albumin, C-reactive protein (CRP), D-dimer, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels in each group of severity outcomes from COVID-19. Results: There were a total of 4848 patients from 23 studies. Our meta-analysis suggest that patients with severe COVID-19 infections have higher procalcitonin, (mean difference 0.07; 95% CI 0.05-0.10; p < 0.00001), CRP (mean difference 36.88; 95% CI 29.10-44.65; p < 0.00001), D-Dimer (mean difference 0.43; 95% CI 0.31-0.56; p < 0.00001), and LDH (mean difference 102.79; 95% CI 79.10-126.49; p < 0.00001) but lower levels of albumin (mean difference −4.58; 95% CI −5.76 to −3.39; p < 0.00001) than those with nonsevere COVID-19 infections. The cutoff values for the parameters were 0.065 ng/mL for procalcitonin, 38.85 g/L for albumin, 33.55 mg/L for CRP, 0.635 μ/L for D-dimer, and 263.5 U/L for LDH, each with high sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests elevated procalcitonin, CRP, D-dimer, and LDH and decreased albumin can be used for predicting severe outcomes in COVID-19.

No abstract

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a pandemic disease that has significant implications on the global health burden. Currently, there is no widely accepted pharmacologic treatment for COVID-19. Remdesivir has been shown effective against various types of viruses, including coronaviruses. This study aimed at synthesizing the latest evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of remdesivir as a potential treatment candidate against COVID-19. Methods: This systematic review has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020183707). A systematic search of the literature was conducted in PubMed, PubMed Central, and Google Scholar through June 5th, 2020. Statistical analysis was done by using the Review Manager 5.4 tool. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) and GRADE analysis was performed to determine the certainty of the evidence. Results: Two studies with a total of 1,300 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that remdesivir was associated with faster time to clinical improvement (MD -4.75 days; 95% CI -4.84 days to -4.65 days; p < 0.00001), reduction in mortality rate (RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.27 – 0.56; p < 0.00001) and fewer incidence of serious adverse events (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.63 – 0.94; p = 0.01). GRADE analysis showed a high certainty for serious adverse events and moderate certainty for time to clinical improvement and mortality rate. Conclusion: Remdesivir is more effective and safer compared with standard care of treatment for the treatment of COVID19 because it was associated with faster time to clinical improvement, reduction in mortality rate, and fewer incidence of serious adverse events.

The three most common comorbidities that are associated with increased mortality in COVID-19 patients are Hypertension, Diabetes, and Cardiovascular disease, Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) are the drugs most commonly prescribed for the management of these diseases. Recent experimental study in animals and humans have found that SARS-CoV-2 uses ACE2 as the receptors for entry. Moreover, in an animal study, the use of ACE inhibitor/ARB increases the level of ACE2 expression that can lead to increased SARS-CoV-2 infectivity. On the other side, some evidences suggest that the ACE2 receptor is not necessary for SARS-CoV-2 entry into the cell and suggested that there is a cofactor that play part. Experimental studies in humans also showed that there is no association between ACE inhibitor/ARB with SARS-CoV-2 infectivity and mortality. In conclusion, there is still insufficient data to stop the use of inhibitor/ARB in SARS-CoV-2 patients. Therefore, we suggested that in line with the recommendations from ESC and AHA/ACC, the use of these two drugs in SARS-CoV-2 patients with cardiovascular comorbidity should still be continued.

No abstract