scholarly journals Corrections: Xu, L.; Mondal, D.; Polya, D.A. Positive Association of Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) with Chronic Exposure to Drinking Water Arsenic (As) at Concentrations below the WHO Provisional Guideline Value: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2536

Author(s):  
Lingqian Xu ◽  
Debapriya Mondal ◽  
David A. Polya

In our recently published meta-analysis, due to an oversight, we treated urinary As concentration data reported by Tsinovoi et al [...]

Author(s):  
Lingqian Xu ◽  
Debapriya Mondal ◽  
David A. Polya

To the best of our knowledge, a dose-response meta-analysis of the relationship between cardiovascular disease (CVD) and arsenic (As) exposure at drinking water As concentrations lower than the WHO provisional guideline value (10 µg/L) has not been published yet. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses to estimate the pooled association between the relative risk of each CVD endpoint and low-level As concentration in drinking water both linearly and non-linearly using a random effects dose-response model. In this study, a significant positive association was found between the risks of most CVD outcomes and drinking water As concentration for both linear and non-linear models (p-value for trend < 0.05). Using the preferred linear model, we found significant increased risks of coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality and CVD mortality as well as combined fatal and non-fatal CHD, CVD, carotid atherosclerosis disease and hypertension in those exposed to drinking water with an As concentration of 10 µg/L compared to the referent (drinking water As concentration of 1 µg/L) population. Notwithstanding limitations included, the observed significant increased risks of CVD endpoints arising from As concentrations in drinking water between 1 µg/L and the 10 µg/L suggests further lowering of this guideline value should be considered.


Author(s):  
V Jain ◽  
J-M Yuan

AbstractBackground/introductionCOVID-19, a novel coronavirus outbreak starting in China, is now a rapidly developing public health emergency of international concern. The clinical spectrum of COVID-19 disease is varied, and identifying factors associated with severe disease has been described as an urgent research priority. It has been noted that elderly patients with pre-existing comorbidities are more vulnerable to more severe disease. However, the specific symptoms and comorbidities that most strongly predict disease severity are unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the symptoms and comorbidities predictive of COVID-19 severity.MethodThis study was prospectively registered on PROSPERO. A literature search was performed in three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Global Health) for studies indexed up to 5thMarch 2020. Two reviewers independently screened the literature and both also completed data extraction. Quality appraisal of studies was performed using the STROBE checklist. Random effects meta-analysis was performed for selected symptoms and comorbidities to identify those most associated with severe COVID-19 infection or ICU admission.ResultsOf the 2259 studies identified, 42 were selected after title and abstract analysis, and 7 studies (including 1813 COVID-19 patients) were chosen for inclusion. The ICU group were older (62.4 years) compared to the non-ICU group (46 years), with a significantly higher proportion of males (67.2% vs. 57.1%, p=0.04). Dyspnoea was the only significant symptom predictive for both severe disease (pOR 3.70, 95% CI 1.83 – 7.46) and ICU admission (pOR 6.55, 95% CI 4.28– 10.0). Notwithstanding the low prevalence of COPD in severe disease and ICU-admitted groups (4.5% and 9.7%, respectively), COPD was the most strongly predictive comorbidity for both severe disease (pOR 6.42, 95% CI 2.44 – 16.9) and ICU admission (pOR 17.8, 95% CI 6.56 – 48.2). Cardiovascular disease and hypertension were also strongly predictive for both severe disease and ICU admission. Those with CVD and hypertension were 4.4 (95% CI 2.64 – 7.47) and 3.7 (95% CI 2.22 – 5.99) times more likely to have an ICU admission respectively, compared to patients without the comorbidity.ConclusionsDyspnoea was the only symptom strongly predictive for both severe disease and ICU admission, and could be useful in guiding clinical management decisions early in the course of illness. When looking at ICU-admitted patients, who represent the more severe end of the spectrum of clinical severity, COPD patients are particularly vulnerable, and those with cardiovascular disease and hypertension are also at a high-risk of severe illness. To aid clinical assessment, risk stratification, efficient resource allocation, and targeted public health interventions, future research must aim to further define those at high-risk of severe illness with COVID-19.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Zhao ◽  
◽  
WenWen Bao ◽  
BoYi Yang ◽  
JingHong Liang ◽  
...  

Review question / Objective: Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease, which remains the leading cause of mortality worldwide. Urban environment as an possible cause of hypertension has received great attention. We aimed to systematically review the associations between greenspace and blood pressure (BP) levels/hypertension and use a meta-analysis to quantify the effects of greenspace on BP levels/hypertension. Condition being studied: Many epidemiological studies have assessed associations of greenspace with blood pressure levels and/or the prevalence of hypertension, whereas the results was inconsistent with some studies showing positive association but the others reporting null or negative associations. Systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize data quantitatively across studies based on the primary outcome.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akshaya Srikanth Bhagavathula ◽  
Abdullah Shehab ◽  
Anhar Ullah ◽  
Jamal Rahmani

Background: The increasing incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) threatens the Middle Eastern population. Several epidemiological studies have assessed CVD and its risk factors in terms of the primary prevention of CVD in the Middle East. Therefore, summarizing the information from these studies is essential. Aim: We conducted a systematic review to assess the prevalence of CVD and its major risk factors among Middle Eastern adults based on the literature published between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2018 and carried out a meta-analysis. Methods: We searched electronic databases such as PubMed/Medline, ScienceDirect, Embase and Google Scholar to identify literature published from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2018. All the original articles that investigated the prevalence of CVD and reported at least one of the following factors were included: hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidaemia, smoking and family history of CVD. To summarize CVD prevalence, we performed a random-effects meta-analysis. Results: A total of 41 potentially relevant articles were included, and 32 were included in the meta-analysis (n=191,979). The overall prevalence of CVD was 10.1% (95% confidence interval (CI): 7.1-14.3%, p<0.001) in the Middle East. A high prevalence of CVD risk factors, such as dyslipidaemia (43.3%; 95% CI: 21.5-68%), hypertension (26.2%; 95% CI: 19.6-34%) and diabetes (16%; 95% CI: 9.9-24.8%), was observed. The prevalence rates of other risk factors, such as smoking (12.4%; 95% CI: 7.7-19.4%) and family history of CVD (18.7%; 95% CI: 15.4-22.5%), were also high. Conclusion: The prevalence of CVD is high (10.1%) in the Middle East. The burden of dyslipidaemia (43.3%) in this region is twice as high as that of hypertension (26.2%) and diabetes mellitus (16%). Multifaceted interventions are urgently needed for the primary prevention of CVD in this region.


Author(s):  
Peter Cox ◽  
Sonal Gupta ◽  
Sizheng Steven Zhao ◽  
David M. Hughes

AbstractThe aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to describe prevalence of cardiovascular disease in gout, compare these results with non-gout controls and consider whether there were differences according to geography. PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science were systematically searched for studies reporting prevalence of any cardiovascular disease in a gout population. Studies with non-representative sampling, where a cohort had been used in another study, small sample size (< 100) and where gout could not be distinguished from other rheumatic conditions were excluded, as were reviews, editorials and comments. Where possible meta-analysis was performed using random-effect models. Twenty-six studies comprising 949,773 gout patients were included in the review. Pooled prevalence estimates were calculated for five cardiovascular diseases: myocardial infarction (2.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI)s 1.6, 5.0), heart failure (8.7%; 95% CI 2.9, 23.8), venous thromboembolism (2.1%; 95% CI 1.2, 3.4), cerebrovascular accident (4.3%; 95% CI 1.8, 9.7) and hypertension (63.9%; 95% CI 24.5, 90.6). Sixteen studies reported comparisons with non-gout controls, illustrating an increased risk in the gout group across all cardiovascular diseases. There were no identifiable reliable patterns when analysing the results by country. Cardiovascular diseases are more prevalent in patients with gout and should prompt vigilance from clinicians to the need to assess and stratify cardiovascular risk. Future research is needed to investigate the link between gout, hyperuricaemia and increased cardiovascular risk and also to establish a more thorough picture of prevalence for less common cardiovascular diseases.


2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 1447-1457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate A. Timmins ◽  
Richard D. Leech ◽  
Mark E. Batt ◽  
Kimberley L. Edwards

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic condition characterized by pain, impaired function, and reduced quality of life. A number of risk factors for knee OA have been identified, such as obesity, occupation, and injury. The association between knee OA and physical activity or particular sports such as running is less clear. Previous reviews, and the evidence that informs them, present contradictory or inconclusive findings. Purpose: This systematic review aimed to determine the association between running and the development of knee OA. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: Four electronic databases were searched, along with citations in eligible articles and reviews and the contents of recent journal issues. Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts using prespecified eligibility criteria. Full-text articles were also independently assessed for eligibility. Eligible studies were those in which running or running-related sports (eg, triathlon or orienteering) were assessed as a risk factor for the onset or progression of knee OA in adults. Relevant outcomes included (1) diagnosis of knee OA, (2) radiographic markers of knee OA, (3) knee joint surgery for OA, (4) knee pain, and (5) knee-associated disability. Risk of bias was judged by use of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed with case-control studies investigating arthroplasty. Results: After de-duplication, the search returned 1322 records. Of these, 153 full-text articles were assessed; 25 were eligible, describing 15 studies: 11 cohort (6 retrospective) and 4 case-control studies. Findings of studies with a diagnostic OA outcome were mixed. Some radiographic differences were observed in runners, but only at baseline within some subgroups. Meta-analysis suggested a protective effect of running against surgery due to OA: pooled odds ratio 0.46 (95% CI, 0.30-0.71). The I2 was 0% (95% CI, 0%-73%). Evidence relating to symptomatic outcomes was sparse and inconclusive. Conclusion: With this evidence, it is not possible to determine the role of running in knee OA. Moderate- to low-quality evidence suggests no association with OA diagnosis, a positive association with OA diagnosis, and a negative association with knee OA surgery. Conflicting results may reflect methodological heterogeneity. More evidence from well-designed, prospective studies is needed to clarify the contradictions.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bhaskar Thakur ◽  
Pallavi Dubey ◽  
Joseph Benitez ◽  
Joshua P. Torres ◽  
Sireesha Reddy ◽  
...  

AbstractSeveral comorbidities have been shown to be associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related severity and mortality. However, considerable variation in the prevalence estimates of comorbidities and their effects on COVID-19 morbidity and mortality have been observed in prior studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine geographical, age, and gender related differences in the prevalence of comorbidities and associated severity and mortality rates among COVID-19 patients. We conducted a search using PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE to include all COVID-19 studies published between January 1st, 2020 to July 24th, 2020 reporting comorbidities with severity or mortality. We included studies reporting the confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 on human patients that also provided information on comorbidities or disease outcomes. We used DerSimonian and Laird random effects method for calculating estimates. Of 120 studies with 125,446 patients, the most prevalent comorbidity was hypertension (32%), obesity (25%), diabetes (18%), and cardiovascular disease (16%) while chronic kidney or other renal diseases (51%, 44%), cerebrovascular accident (43%, 44%), and cardiovascular disease (44%, 40%) patients had more COVID-19 severity and mortality respectively. Considerable variation in the prevalence of comorbidities and associated disease severity and mortality in different geographic regions was observed. The highest mortality was observed in studies with Latin American and European patients with any medical condition, mostly older adults (≥ 65 years), and predominantly male patients. Although the US studies observed the highest prevalence of comorbidities in COVID-19 patients, the severity of COVID-19 among each comorbid condition was highest in Asian studies whereas the mortality was highest in the European and Latin American countries. Risk stratification and effective control strategies for the COVID-19 should be done according to comorbidities, age, and gender differences specific to geographical location.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document