Differences in door-to-balloon time and outcomes in SARS-CoV-2-positive ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background:

The coronavirus disease 2019 infection has significantly impacted the world and placed a heavy strain on the medical system and the public, especially those with cardiovascular diseases. Hoverer, the differences in door-to-balloon time and outcomes in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are not known too much.

Methods:

Web of Science, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, VIP, and China’s National Knowledge Infrastructure were utilized to perform a systematic literature search until April 30, 2023. We computed the odds ratios (ORs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to determine the correlation. A random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis if the study had significant heterogeneity. Meanwhile, sensitivity analysis and Trial sequential analysis were also accomplished using Rveman5.4 and trial sequential analysis 0.9.5.10 Beta software, respectively.

Results:

A total of 5 eligible studies were explored in our meta-analysis, including 307 cases and 1804 controls. By meta-analysis, the pooled data showed that SARS-CoV-2-positive STEMI patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention had a longer door-to-balloon time (OR 6.31, 95% CI 0.99, 11.63, P = .02) than the negative subjects. The glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use after SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.53, 4.81, P = .0006) was relatively frequent compared with controls, and the postoperative Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction blood flow (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34, 0.67, P < .0001) was worse compared that. The in-hospital mortality (OR 5.16, 95% CI 3.53, 7.53, P < .00001) was higher than non-SARS-CoV-2 infection ones. In addition, we also discovered that age, gender (male), hypertension, diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, smoking, previous myocardial infarction, total ischemia time, and thrombus aspiration use did not have a significant association with the development of STEMI patients with SARS-CoV-2.

Conclusion:

SARS-CoV-2 positivity is significantly associated with longer door-to-balloon time and higher in-hospital mortality in STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Related collections

Most cited references 42

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

Matthew J L Page, Joanne E McKenzie, Patrick Bossuyt … (2024)

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.

0 comments Cited 13280 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

COVID-19 and comorbidities: Deleterious impact on infected patients

Hasan Ejaz, Abdullah Alsrhani, Aizza Zafar … (2020)

The pandemic situation with the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from China has endangered human lives. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is presented with asymptomatic, mild, or severe pneumonia-like symptoms. COVID-19 patients with diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cardiovascular diseases (CVD), hypertension, malignancies, HIV, and other comorbidities could develop a life-threatening situation. SARS-CoV-2 utilizes ACE-2 receptors found at the surface of the host cells to get inside the cell. Certain comorbidities are associated with a strong ACE-2 receptor expression and higher release of proprotein convertase that enhance the viral entry into the host cells. The comorbidities lead to the COVID-19 patient into a vicious infectious circle of life and are substantially associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The comorbid individuals must adopt the vigilant preventive measure and requires scrupulous management. In this review, we rigorously focused on the impact of common morbidities in COVID-19 patients and recapitulated the management strategies with recent directions. We found limited resources describing the association of comorbidities in COVID-19; however, our review delineates the broader spectrum of comorbidities with COVID-19 patients.

0 comments Cited 339 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Trial Sequential Analysis in systematic reviews with meta-analysis

Jørn Wetterslev, Janus Jakobsen, Christian Gluud (2017)

Background Most meta-analyses in systematic reviews, including Cochrane ones, do not have sufficient statistical power to detect or refute even large intervention effects. This is why a meta-analysis ought to be regarded as an interim analysis on its way towards a required information size. The results of the meta-analyses should relate the total number of randomised participants to the estimated required meta-analytic information size accounting for statistical diversity. When the number of participants and the corresponding number of trials in a meta-analysis are insufficient, the use of the traditional 95% confidence interval or the 5% statistical significance threshold will lead to too many false positive conclusions (type I errors) and too many false negative conclusions (type II errors). Methods We developed a methodology for interpreting meta-analysis results, using generally accepted, valid evidence on how to adjust thresholds for significance in randomised clinical trials when the required sample size has not been reached. Results The Lan-DeMets trial sequential monitoring boundaries in Trial Sequential Analysis offer adjusted confidence intervals and restricted thresholds for statistical significance when the diversity-adjusted required information size and the corresponding number of required trials for the meta-analysis have not been reached. Trial Sequential Analysis provides a frequentistic approach to control both type I and type II errors. We define the required information size and the corresponding number of required trials in a meta-analysis and the diversity (D2) measure of heterogeneity. We explain the reasons for using Trial Sequential Analysis of meta-analysis when the actual information size fails to reach the required information size. We present examples drawn from traditional meta-analyses using unadjusted naïve 95% confidence intervals and 5% thresholds for statistical significance. Spurious conclusions in systematic reviews with traditional meta-analyses can be reduced using Trial Sequential Analysis. Several empirical studies have demonstrated that the Trial Sequential Analysis provides better control of type I errors and of type II errors than the traditional naïve meta-analysis. Conclusions Trial Sequential Analysis represents analysis of meta-analytic data, with transparent assumptions, and better control of type I and type II errors than the traditional meta-analysis using naïve unadjusted confidence intervals.

0 comments Cited 241 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Rui Li

Chengfeng Wang

Shan Wang

Minli Cheng

Chunhua Pu

Lei Zou

Chao Liu

Qine Zhang

Qun Wang

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Medicine (Baltimore)

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Medicine (Baltimore)

Journal ID (publisher-id): MD

Title: Medicine

Publisher: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (Hagerstown, MD )

ISSN (Print): 0025-7974

ISSN (Electronic): 1536-5964

Publication date (Electronic): 13 October 2023

Publication date Collection: 13 October 2023

Volume: 102

Issue: 41

Electronic Location Identifier: e35612

Affiliations

[a ] Department of Cardiology, Dayi County People’s Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

[b ] Department of Medical Laboratory, Dayi County People’s Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.

Author notes

[* ] Correspondence: Qinxue Bao, Department of Cardiology, Dayi County People’s Hospital, Chengdu 611330, Sichuan, China (e-mail: baoqinxue_1989@ 123456163.com ).

Author information

Qinxue Bao https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6777-4287

Article

Accession ID: 00002

DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000035612

PMC ID: 10578758

PubMed ID: 37832042

SO-VID: cbb319d6-9fed-427e-b1d0-dd0ec815c01d

License:

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal.

History

Date received : 21 August 2023

Date received : 20 September 2023

Date accepted : 21 September 2023

Custom metadata

OPEN-ACCESS TRUE

Keywords: covid-19,door-to-balloon time,in-hospital mortality,stemi

Data availability:

Keywords: covid-19, door-to-balloon time, in-hospital mortality, stemi

Differences in door-to-balloon time and outcomes in SARS-CoV-2-positive ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Read this article at

Abstract

Background:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 42

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

COVID-19 and comorbidities: Deleterious impact on infected patients

Trial Sequential Analysis in systematic reviews with meta-analysis

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Author information

Article

History

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 147

Most referenced authors 1,570