An Updated Review on COVID-19

Ebada, Mahmoud Ahmed; Wadaa-Allah, Ahmed; Bahbah, Eshak I.; Negida, Ahmed

doi:10.2174/1871526520666201216165322

Cited by 17 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By the end of October 2020, the COVID-19 outbreak has affected more than 200 countries in various regions of the world; according to the WHO situation reports, the number of COVID-19 confirmed cases reached more than 41,571,000 cases and 1,135,000 related deaths worldwide [ 3 ]. In the past few months, the COVID-19 pandemic landscape has changed with a dramatic shift in the apex of the number of confirmed cases from China to the United States (US), Europe, and Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) [ 4 , 5 ]. In the EMR, the number of confirmed cases is approaching three million cases by October 2020, with a fatality rate of 2.6% [ 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of severity and development of critical illness of Egyptian COVID-19 patients: A multicenter study

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives We conducted the present multicenter, retrospective study to assess the epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics associated with critical illness among patients with COVID-19 from Egypt. Methods The present study was a multicenter, retrospective study that retrieved the data of all Egyptian cases with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to hospitals affiliated to the General Organization for Teaching Hospitals and Institutes (GOTHI) through the period from March to July 2020. The diagnosis of COVID-19 was based on a positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) laboratory test. Results This retrospective study included 2724 COVID-19 patients, of whom 423 (15.52%) were critically ill. Approximately 45.86% of the critical group aged above 60 years, compared to 39.59% in the non-critical group (p = 0.016). Multivariate analysis showed that many factors were predictors of critically illness, including age >60 years (OR = 1.30, 95% CI [1.05, 1.61], p = 0.014), low oxygen saturation (OR = 0.93, 95% CI [0.91, 0.95], p<0.001), low Glasgow coma scale (OR = 0.75, 95% CI [0.67, 0.84], p<0.001), diabetes (OR = 1.62, 95% CI [1.26, 2.08], p<0.001), cancer (OR = 2.47, 95% CI [1.41, 4.35], p = 0.002), and serum ferritin (OR = 1.004, 95% CI [1.0003, 1.008], p = 0.031). Conclusion In the present report, we demonstrated that many factors are associated with COVID-19 critical illness, including older age groups, fatigue, elevated temperature, increased pulse, lower oxygen saturation, the preexistence of diabetes, malignancies, cardiovascular disease, renal diseases, and pulmonary disease. Moreover, elevated serum levels of ALT, AST, and ferritin are associated with worse outcomes. Further studies are required to identify independent predictors of mortality for patients with COVID-19.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of severity and development of critical illness of Egyptian COVID-19 patients: A multicenter study

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Different treatment options have been investigated since the inception of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in late 2019, including immunotherapy, nucleoside analogs, and others [ 1 , 2 ]. To prevent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection or to lessen the severity of the disease, with the ultimate aim of reducing mortality and morbidity, researchers have investigated a variety of platforms for vaccine development, including protein-based and viral-based vaccines [ 3 , 4 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risks of Cardiac Arrhythmia Associated with COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the current evidence regarding the association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and the risk of cardiac arrhythmia. MEDLINE, via PubMed and OVID, Scopus, CENTRAL, and Web of Science were searched using the relevant keywords to identify the relevant citations. Comprehensive Meta-analysis and Review Manager 5.4.1 were used for all the statistical analyses. Seventeen studies (n = 567,033,087 patients) were included. The pooled analysis showed that the incidence of cardiac arrhythmia post-COVID-19 vaccination with Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, CoronaVac, and Sinopharm was 0.22%, 95% CI: (0.07% to 0.66%), 0.76%, 95% CI: (0.04% to 12.08%), 0.04%, 95% CI: (0.00% to 0.98%), 0.01%, 95% CI: (0.00% to 0.03%), and 0.03%, 95% CI: (0.00% to 18.48%), respectively. Compared to CoronaVac, Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, and Sinopharm had a higher incidence ratio rate (IRR; 22-times, 76-times, 4-times, and 3-times higher), respectively. Likewise, Pfizer, Moderna, and AstraZeneca showed a higher IRR than Sinopharm (7.3-times, 25.3-times, and 1.3-times higher). The current evidence shows that the incidence rate (IR) of cardiac arrhythmia post-COVID-19 vaccination is rare and ranges between 1 and 76 per 10,000. mRNA vaccines were associated with a higher IR of arrhythmia compared to vector-based vaccines. Inactivated vaccines showed the lowest IR of arrhythmia.

show abstract

“…Over half of all people with diabetes are undiagnosed, and only one-third have good disease control. Individuals with untreated or uncontrolled DM are more likely to develop long-term consequences and die prematurely because of cardiovascular and infectious diseases (e.g., tuberculosis and COVID-19) [2][3][4][5][6]. With a regional incidence of 16.2% and the second-highest forecasted rise (86%) in the number of people with DM, the Middle East and North African (MENA) area is estimated to have 136 million patients with DM by 2045 [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Point-of-Care and Laboratory Glycated Hemoglobin A1c and Its Relationship to Time-in-Range and Glucose Variability: A Real-World Study

Hayek¹,

Alzahrani²,

Sobki³

et al. 2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The main objective of the current study was to perform a comparison of point-of-care testing for hemoglobin A1c (POCT-HbA1c) versus the standard laboratory method (Lab HbA1c) and their relationship to time-in-range (TIR) and glucose variability (GV) among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) presented to the outpatient diabetes clinics. Methods This single-center cross-sectional study was carried out on diabetic patients (aged ≥14 years of both genders) who undergo routine follow-up at our institution and whose physicians ordered HbA1c analysis for routine care. The included patients were those using the intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) Abbott’s FreeStyle Libre system for at least three months and regular CGM users with at least 70% use. Results We included 97 diabetic patients (41 female and 56 male), with a median age of 25 years (Interquartile range= 18) and a mean DM duration of 10.33±5.48 years. The mean values of Lab-HbA1c and POCT HbA1c were 8.82%±0.85% and 8.53%±0.89%, respectively. The TIR, time below range, and time above range were 33.47±14.38 minutes (47.78%±14.32%), 5.44±2.58 minutes (8.41%±4.42%), and 28.8±8.27 minutes (43.81%±13.22%), respectively. According to the Bland-Altman plot analysis, the POCT-HbA1c values are consistent with the standard Lab-HbA1c values (SD of bias= 0.55, and 95% CI= -0.78 to 1.4). The univariate linear regression analysis showed a statistically significant relationship between laboratory HbA1c and POCT HbA1c (R2= 0.637, p <0.001), TIR (R2= 0.406, p <0.001), and GV (R2= 0.048, p = 0.032). After adjusting for age, gender, disease duration, diabetes type, and percentage of sensor data in a multivariable linear regression model, the linear associations remained significant (all p < 0.05). Conclusion The current findings show that TIR and GV can be used as endpoints and valuable parameters for the therapy of DM.

show abstract

An Updated Review on COVID-19

Cited by 17 publications

References 0 publications

Predictors of severity and development of critical illness of Egyptian COVID-19 patients: A multicenter study

Predictors of severity and development of critical illness of Egyptian COVID-19 patients: A multicenter study

Risks of Cardiac Arrhythmia Associated with COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Comparison of Point-of-Care and Laboratory Glycated Hemoglobin A1c and Its Relationship to Time-in-Range and Glucose Variability: A Real-World Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About