Clinical features and outcomes of pregnant women with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Background Vitamin D deficiency among pregnant women is a public health concern globally. In India, individual studies report high prevalence. However, lack of national data masks the true burden. This work determined the pooled prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among pregnant women in India through a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis. Methods Three different search engines yielded 15 eligible articles. Study quality was assessed by 10 different criteria and summary of study quality was categorized as per Cochrane standards. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among healthy pregnant women and heterogeneity among selected studies. A sample of n = 4088 was used to study the pooled prevalence among pregnant women. Results The random effects combined estimate was 32.35% (95% CI, (12.58–117.48). High heterogeneity (tau2 = 0.39, I2 = 100%) and high risk of bias was observed among the selected studies. The test for overall effect was observed to be z = 2.54(P = 0.01). Conclusion Pooled estimate > 30% emphasizes the need for screening through antenatal care services and initiate preventive measures to address the deficiency.

Download Full-text

The Additional use of hydroxychloroquine can improve the live birth rate in pregnant women with persistent positive antiphospholipid antibodies: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction ◽

10.1016/j.jogoh.2021.102121 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 102121

Author(s):

Tian Yuan ◽

Jinfeng Xu ◽

Daijuan Chen ◽

Chunsong Yang ◽

Bing Peng

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Pregnant Women ◽

Live Birth ◽

Antiphospholipid Antibodies ◽

Birth Rate ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Live Birth Rate

Download Full-text

Clinical features and outcomes of COVID-19 in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMC Geriatrics ◽

10.1186/s12877-021-02261-3 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Sunny Singhal ◽

Pramod Kumar ◽

Sumitabh Singh ◽

Srishti Saha ◽

Aparajit Ballav Dey

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Older Adults ◽

Critically Ill ◽

Clinical Features ◽

Older Patients ◽

Clinical Characteristics ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Severe Infection ◽

Factors Affecting ◽

Pooled Prevalence

Abstract Background Few studies have focused on exploring the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in older patients. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to have a better understanding of the clinical characteristics of older COVID-19 patients. Methods A systematic search of PubMed and Scopus was performed from December 2019 to May 3rd, 2020. Observational studies including older adults (age ≥ 60 years) with COVID-19 infection and reporting clinical characteristics or outcome were included. Primary outcome was assessing weighted pooled prevalence (WPP) of severity and outcomes. Secondary outcomes were clinical features including comorbidities and need of respiratory support. Result Forty-six studies with 13,624 older patients were included. Severe infection was seen in 51% (95% CI– 36-65%, I2–95%) patients while 22% (95% CI– 16-28%, I2–88%) were critically ill. Overall, 11% (95% CI– 5-21%, I2–98%) patients died. The common comorbidities were hypertension (48, 95% CI– 36-60% I2–92%), diabetes mellitus (22, 95% CI– 13-32%, I2–86%) and cardiovascular disease (19, 95% CI – 11-28%, I2–85%). Common symptoms were fever (83, 95% CI– 66-97%, I2–91%), cough (60, 95% CI– 50-70%, I2–71%) and dyspnoea (42, 95% CI– 19-67%, I2–94%). Overall, 84% (95% CI– 60-100%, I2–81%) required oxygen support and 21% (95% CI– 0-49%, I2–91%) required mechanical ventilation. Majority of studies had medium to high risk of bias and overall quality of evidence was low for all outcomes. Conclusion Approximately half of older patients with COVID-19 have severe infection, one in five are critically ill and one in ten die. More high-quality evidence is needed to study outcomes in this vulnerable patient population and factors affecting these outcomes.

Download Full-text

The Impact of Diagnostic Criteria for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus on Adverse Maternal Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal of Clinical Medicine ◽

10.3390/jcm10040666 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (4) ◽

pp. 666

Author(s):

Fahimeh Ramezani Tehrani ◽

Marzieh Saei Ghare Naz ◽

Razieh Bidhendi Yarandi ◽

Samira Behboudi-Gandevani

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Gestational Diabetes ◽

Pregnant Women ◽

Diagnostic Criteria ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Population Based ◽

Maternal Outcomes ◽

Care Providers ◽

Iadpsg Criteria ◽

The Impact

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the impact of different gestational-diabetes (GDM) diagnostic-criteria on the risk of adverse-maternal-outcomes. The search process encompassed PubMed (Medline), Scopus, and Web of Science databases to retrieve original, population-based studies with the universal GDM screening approach, published in English language and with a focus on adverse-maternal-outcomes up to January 2020. According to GDM diagnostic criteria, the studies were classified into seven groups. A total of 49 population-based studies consisting of 1409018 pregnant women with GDM and 7,667,546 non-GDM counterparts were selected for data analysis and knowledge synthesis. Accordingly, the risk of adverse-maternal-outcomes including primary-cesarean, induction of labor, maternal-hemorrhage, and pregnancy-related-hypertension, overall, regardless of GDM diagnostic-criteria and in all diagnostic-criteria subgroups were significantly higher than non-GDM counterparts. However, in meta-regression, the increased risk was not influenced by the GDM diagnostic-classification and the magnitude of the risks among patients, using the IADPSG criteria-classification as the most strict-criteria, was similar to other criteria. In conclusion, a reduction in the diagnostic-threshold increased the prevalence of GDM, but the risk of adverse-maternal-outcome was not different among those women who were diagnosed through more or less intensive strategies. Our review findings can empower health-care-providers to select the most cost-effective approach for the screening of GDM among pregnant women.

Download Full-text