-
International Journal of Environmental... Jan 2023Little is known about the long-term consequences of asymptomatic infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We aimed to review the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Little is known about the long-term consequences of asymptomatic infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We aimed to review the data available to explore the long-term consequences of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the real world. We searched observational cohort studies that described the long-term health effects of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. Random-effects inverse-variance models were used to evaluate the pooled prevalence (PP) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of long-term symptoms. Random effects were used to estimate the pooled odds ratios (OR) and its 95%CI of different long-term symptoms between symptomatic and asymptomatic infections. Five studies involving a total of 1643 cases, including 597 cases of asymptomatic and 1043 cases of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in this meta-analysis. The PPs of long-term consequences after asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections were 17.13% (95%CI, 7.55−26.71%) for at least one symptom, 15.09% (95%CI, 5.46−24.73%) for loss of taste, 14.14% (95%CI, −1.32−29.61%) for loss of smell, and 9.33% (95%CI, 3.07−15.60) for fatigue. Compared with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, asymptomatic infection was associated with a significantly lower risk of developing COVID-19-related sequelae (p < 0.05), with 80% lower risk of developing at least one symptom (OR = 0.20, 95%CI, 0.09−0.45), 81% lower risk of fatigue (OR = 0.19, 95%CI, 0.08−0.49), 90% lower risk of loss of taste/smell (OR = 0.10, 95%CI, 0.02−0.58). Our results suggested that there were long-term effects of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, such as loss of taste or smell, fatigue, cough and so on. However, the risk of developing long-term symptoms in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infected persons was significantly lower than those in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection cases.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Ageusia; Asymptomatic Infections; Fatigue
PubMed: 36674367
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20021613 -
The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal Mar 2023Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections have raised concerns for public health policies to manage epidemics. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections have raised concerns for public health policies to manage epidemics. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the age-specific proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infected persons globally by year of age.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, medRxiv and Google Scholar on September 10, 2020, and March 1, 2021. We included studies conducted during January to December 2020, before routine vaccination against COVID-19. Because we expected the relationship between the asymptomatic proportion and age to be nonlinear, multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression (QR decomposition) with a restricted cubic spline was used to model asymptomatic proportions as a function of age.
RESULTS
A total of 38 studies were included in the meta-analysis. In total, 6556 of 14,850 cases were reported as asymptomatic. The overall estimate of the proportion of people who became infected with SARS-CoV-2 and remained asymptomatic throughout infection was 44.1% (6556/14,850, 95% CI: 43.3%-45.0%). The predicted asymptomatic proportion peaked in children (36.2%, 95% CI: 26.0%-46.5%) at 13.5 years, gradually decreased by age and was lowest at 90.5 years of age (8.1%, 95% CI: 3.4%-12.7%).
CONCLUSIONS
Given the high rates of asymptomatic carriage in adolescents and young adults and their active role in virus transmission in the community, heightened vigilance and public health strategies are needed among these individuals to prevent disease transmission.
Topics: Child; Adolescent; Young Adult; Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Epidemics; Public Health; Asymptomatic Infections
PubMed: 36730054
DOI: 10.1097/INF.0000000000003791 -
VASA. Zeitschrift Fur Gefasskrankheiten May 2022Asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) can cause cognitive dysfunction, related to cerebral hypoperfusion and microemboli. These mechanisms could be treated by carotid... (Review)
Review
Asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) can cause cognitive dysfunction, related to cerebral hypoperfusion and microemboli. These mechanisms could be treated by carotid revascularization, but the impact of carotid angioplasty stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) on cognitive functions remains unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to realize a report on the actual state of results about asymptomatic carotid stenosis revascularization and cognitive function. We performed a systematic literature review to analyze all studies assessing the impact of asymptomatic carotid stenosis revascularizations on cognitive functions. We reviewed all publications published in Medline database and Cochrane between January 2010 and January 2020 including subjects with a cognitive evaluation and receiving carotid revascularization for asymptomatic stenosis. We identified 567 records for review, and finally we included in the systematic review 20 studies about ACS revascularization and cognitive functions. Only observational studies analyzed the impact of CEA and CAS on cognitive functions. Thus, too heterogeneous data associated to the lack of randomized controlled trials with an evaluation of optimal medical treatment did not enable to affirm the interest of the revascularization management of ACS in cognitive domain. There was a lack of standardization and finally studies were too heterogeneous to conclude on the impact of carotid revascularization on cognitive functions. There is an urgent need to harmonize research in this domain in order to prevent and treat cognitive dysfunction related to ACS, especially in our society with an aging population.
Topics: Aged; Angioplasty; Asymptomatic Diseases; Carotid Stenosis; Cognition; Constriction, Pathologic; Endarterectomy, Carotid; Humans; Stents; Stroke; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35306881
DOI: 10.1024/0301-1526/a000996 -
JAMA Jul 2023Familial hypercholesterolemia and multifactorial dyslipidemia are 2 conditions that cause abnormally high lipid levels in children, which can lead to premature...
IMPORTANCE
Familial hypercholesterolemia and multifactorial dyslipidemia are 2 conditions that cause abnormally high lipid levels in children, which can lead to premature cardiovascular events (eg, myocardial infarction and stroke) and death in adulthood.
OBJECTIVE
The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for lipid disorders in asymptomatic children and adolescents.
POPULATION
Asymptomatic children and adolescents 20 years or younger without a known diagnosis of a lipid disorder.
EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT
The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient and the balance of benefits and harms for screening for lipid disorders in asymptomatic children and adolescents 20 years or younger cannot be determined.
RECOMMENDATION
The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for lipid disorders in children and adolescents 20 years or younger. (I statement).
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Humans; Advisory Committees; Dyslipidemias; Lipids; Mass Screening; Preventive Health Services; Risk Assessment; Young Adult; Asymptomatic Diseases; Cardiovascular Diseases
PubMed: 37462699
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.11330 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery Sep 2023Sex differences regarding the safety and efficacy of carotid revascularization in carotid artery stenosis have been addressed in several studies with conflicting... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Sex differences regarding the safety and efficacy of carotid revascularization in carotid artery stenosis have been addressed in several studies with conflicting results. Moreover, women are underrepresented in clinical trials, leading to limited conclusions regarding the safety and efficacy of acute stroke treatments.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by literature search including four databases from January 1985 to December 2021. Sex differences in the efficacy and safety of revascularization procedures, including carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS), for symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenoses were analyzed.
RESULTS
Regarding CEA in symptomatic carotid artery stenosis, the stroke risk in men (3.6%) and women (3.9%) based on 99,495 patients (30 studies) did not differ (P = .16). There was also no difference in the stroke risk by different time frames up to 10 years. Compared with men, women treated with CEA had a significantly higher stroke or death rate at 4 months (2 studies, 2565 patients; 7.2% vs 5.0%; odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.12; I = 0%; P = .03), and a significantly higher rate of restenosis (1 study, 615; 17.2% vs 6.7%; OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.66-4.75; P = .0001). For CAS in symptomatic artery stenosis, data showed a non-significant tendency toward higher peri-procedural stroke in women, whereas for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis, data based on 332,344 patients showed that women (compared with men) after CEA had similar rates of stroke, stroke or death, and the composite outcome stroke/death/myocardial infarction. The rate of restenosis at 1 year was significantly higher in women compared with men (1 study, 372 patients; 10.8% vs 3.2%; OR, 3.71; 95% CI, 1.49-9.2; P = .005). Furthermore, CAS in asymptomatic patients was associated with low risk of a postprocedural stroke in both sexes, but a significantly higher risk of in-hospital myocardial infarction in women than men (8445 patients, 1.2% vs 0.6%; OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.23-3.28; I = 0%; P = .005).
CONCLUSIONS
A few sex-differences in short-term outcomes after carotid revascularization for symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis were found, although there were no significant differences in the overall stroke. This indicates a need for larger multicenter prospective studies to evaluate these sex-specific differences. More women, including those aged over 80 years, need to be enrolled in randomized controlled trials, to better understand if sex differences exist and to tailor carotid revascularization accordingly.
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Aged, 80 and over; Carotid Stenosis; Sex Characteristics; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Stents; Endarterectomy, Carotid; Carotid Arteries; Stroke; Myocardial Infarction; Constriction, Pathologic; Risk Factors; Risk Assessment; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37055001
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2023.03.502 -
European Journal of Preventive... Apr 2024Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an atherogenic lipid particle associated with increased risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) events. Coronary artery calcium (CAC) score is a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an atherogenic lipid particle associated with increased risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) events. Coronary artery calcium (CAC) score is a tool to diagnose subclinical atherosclerosis and guide clinical decision-making for primary prevention of CHD. Studies show conflicting results concerning the relationship between Lp(a) and CAC in asymptomatic populations. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the association of Lp(a) and CAC in asymptomatic patients.
METHODS AND RESULTS
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane until April 2023 for studies evaluating the association between Lp(a) and CAC in asymptomatic patients. We evaluated CAC > 0 Agatston units, and CAC ≥ 100. Lp(a) was analysed as a continuous or dichotomous variable. We assessed the association between Lp(a) and CAC with pooled odds ratios (OR) adopting a random-effects model. A total of 23 105 patients from 18 studies were included in the meta-analysis with a mean age of 55.9 years, 46.4% female. Elevated Lp(a) increased the odds of CAC > 0 [OR 1.31; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.05-1.64; P = 0.02], CAC ≥100 (OR 1.29; 95% CI 1.01-1.65; P = 0.04; ), and CAC progression (OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.20-1.70; P < 0.01; ). For each increment of 1 mg/dL in Lp(a) there was a 1% in the odds of CAC > 0 (OR 1.01; 95% CI 1.01-1.01; P < 0.01).
CONCLUSION
Our findings of this meta-analysis suggest that Lp(a) is positively associated with a higher likelihood of CAC. Higher Lp(a) levels increased the odds of CAC >0. These data support the concept that Lp(a) is atherogenic, although with high heterogeneity and a low level of certainty.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
CRD42023422034.
KEY FINDINGS
Asymptomatic patients with elevated Lp(a) had 31% higher chances of having any coronary calcification (CAC > 0) and 29% higher chances of having more advanced calcification (CAC > 100). It increased the chances of having progression of coronary calcification over time by 43%. For each 1 mg/dL of Lp(a) there was an increment of 1% chance of having coronary calcification.
Topics: Humans; Female; Middle Aged; Male; Calcium; Coronary Artery Disease; Risk Factors; Coronary Vessels; Lipoprotein(a); Atherosclerosis; Calcinosis; Vascular Calcification
PubMed: 38300625
DOI: 10.1093/eurjpc/zwae043 -
International Journal of Cardiology Jul 2015Up to 40% of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients are asymptomatic. Despite this, scarce data are available about asymptomatic AF, with regard to its clinical profile and... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Up to 40% of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients are asymptomatic. Despite this, scarce data are available about asymptomatic AF, with regard to its clinical profile and relationship to cerebrovascular and cardiovascular risks. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis was to study the relationship between age and gender with asymptomatic AF and to establish whether patients with asymptomatic AF have a higher risk of death (all-cause and cardiovascular) and stroke/systemic thromboembolism, when compared to symptomatic AF patients. After a comprehensive search, 6 studies (2 randomized clinical trials and 4 observational studies) were entered in the meta-analysis. Despite significant heterogeneity, our data show that the prevalence of females amongst asymptomatic AF group was significantly less compared to the symptomatic AF group (RR, 0.57; 95% CI: 0.52-0.64). No difference in age between asymptomatic and symptomatic AF patients (P=0.72) was seen. No differences were found in all-cause death between patients with asymptomatic and symptomatic AF (RR, 1.38; 95% CI: 0.82-2.17), nor in cardiovascular death (RR, 0.85; 95% CI: 0.53-1.36) or stroke/thromboembolism (RR, 1.72 95% CI: 0.59-5.08). Asymptomatic AF is more associated with male sex, irrespective of age. Both general and cardiovascular death risks as well as thromboembolic risk do not seem to be affected by the asymptomatic clinical status. Symptomatic status should not determine our approach to stroke prevention and other cardiovascular prevention therapies, amongst patients with AF.
Topics: Age Factors; Asymptomatic Diseases; Atrial Fibrillation; Female; Humans; Male; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sex Characteristics; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25974193
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.05.011 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Sep 2020Characterization of pediatric coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is necessary to control the pandemic, as asymptomatic or mildly infected children may act as carriers.... (Review)
Review
Characterization of pediatric coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is necessary to control the pandemic, as asymptomatic or mildly infected children may act as carriers. To date, there are limited reports describing differences in clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics between asymptomatic and symptomatic infection, and between younger and older pediatric patients. The objective of this study is to compare characteristics among: (1) asymptomatic versus symptomatic and (2) less than 10 versus greater or equal to 10 years old pediatric COVID-19 patients. We searched for all terms related to pediatric COVID-19 in electronic databases (Embase, Medline, PubMed, and Web of Science) for articles from January 2020. This protocol followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Eligible study designs included case reports and series, while we excluded comments/letters, reviews, and literature not written in English. Initially, 817 articles were identified. Forty-three articles encompassing 158 confirmed pediatric COVID-19 cases were included in the final analyses. Lymphocytosis and high CRP were associated with symptomatic infection. Abnormal chest CT more accurately detected asymptomatic COVID-19 in older patients than in younger ones, but clinical characteristics were similar between older and younger patients. Chest CT scan findings are untrustworthy in younger children with COVID-19 as compared with clinical findings, or significant differences in findings between asymptomatic to symptomatic children. Further studies evaluating pediatric COVID-19 could contribute to potential therapeutic interventions and preventive strategies to limit spreading.
Topics: Adolescent; Betacoronavirus; COVID-19; Child; Child, Preschool; Coronavirus Infections; Female; Humans; Lung; Male; Pandemics; Pneumonia, Viral; SARS-CoV-2; Tomography, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 32942705
DOI: 10.3390/medicina56090474 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery Jun 2022Asymptomatic carotid stenosis has been associated with a progressive decline in neurocognitive function. However, the effect of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) on this... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Asymptomatic carotid stenosis has been associated with a progressive decline in neurocognitive function. However, the effect of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) on this process is poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate preoperative and postoperative cognitive function changes in asymptomatic patients after CEA.
METHODS
A systematic review of the existing reports in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochran databases was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis statement recommendations. All original retrospective or prospective studies (including cohort, cross-sectional, case-control, pilot studies, etc) and clinical trials that compared pre and postoperative neurocognitive function in asymptomatic patients with carotid stenosis after CEA, which were published from January 2000 to April 2021 were identified and considered eligible for inclusion in the study.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies (502 CEAs) comparing cognitive function changes before and after CEA were identified. In 7 studies with a total 272 patients, a mean age range of 67.3 ± 4.8 to 76.35 years old, and follow-up ranging between 1 and 12 months, overall cognitive function improved after CEA. However, in 6 studies with a total sample of 230, a mean age range of 68.6 ± 6.9 to 74.4 ± 6.1 years, and follow-up ranged from 24 hours to 3 years, showed no change or decline in overall cognitive function after procedures.
CONCLUSIONS
The lack of standardization of specific cognitive tests and cognitive function assessment timing after CEA does not allow for definite conclusions to be made. However, improving brain perfusion with a combination of CEA and statin therapy may be a protective strategy against cognitive function decline.
Topics: Aged; Carotid Stenosis; Child; Child, Preschool; Cognition; Cross-Sectional Studies; Endarterectomy, Carotid; Humans; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34995717
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2021.12.059 -
Open Heart May 2022The management of severe aortic stenosis mandates consideration of aortic valve intervention for symptomatic patients. However, for asymptomatic patients with severe... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The management of severe aortic stenosis mandates consideration of aortic valve intervention for symptomatic patients. However, for asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis, recent randomised trials supported earlier intervention. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate all the available data comparing the two management strategies.
METHODS
PubMed, Cochrane and Web of Science databases were systematically searched from inception until 10 January 2022. The search key terms were 'asymptomatic', 'severe aortic stenosis' and 'intervention'.
RESULTS
Meta-analysis of two published randomised trials, AVATAR and RECOVERY, included 302 patients and showed that early intervention resulted in 55% reduction in all-cause mortality (HR=0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.86; I 0%) and 79% reduction in risk of hospitalisation for heart failure (HR=0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.96; I 15%). There was no difference in risk of cardiovascular death between the two groups (HR=0.36, 95% CI 0.03 to 3.78; I 78%). Additionally, meta-analysis of eight observational studies showed improved mortality in patients treated with early intervention (HR=0.38, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.56; I 77%).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis provides evidence that, in patients with severe asymptomatic aortic stenosis, early intervention reduces all-cause mortality and improves outcomes compared with conservative management. While this is very encouraging, further randomised controlled studies are needed to draw firm conclusions and identify the optimal timing of intervention.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022301037.
Topics: Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Conservative Treatment; Heart Failure; Humans; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
PubMed: 35581008
DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2022-001982