Clinical and historical features associated with severe COVID-19 infection: a systematic review

JL Pigoga, A Friedman, M Broccoli, S Hirner, AV Naidoo, S Singh, K Werner, LA Wallis
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.23.20076653

ABSTRACT

Background There is an urgent need for rapid assessment methods to guide pathways of care for COVID-19 patients, as frontline providers need to make challenging decisions surrounding rationing of resources. This study aimed to evaluate existing literature for factors associated with COVID-19 illness severity.

Methods A systematic review identified all studies published between 1/12/19 and 19/4/20 that used primary data and inferential statistics to assess associations between the outcome of interest - disease severity - and historical or clinical variables. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the WHO Database of Publications on Coronavirus Disease were searched. Data were independently extracted and cross-checked independently by two reviewers using PRISMA guidelines, after which they were descriptively analysed. Quality and risk of bias in available evidence were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. This review was registered with PROSPERO, registration number CRD42020178098.

Results Of the 6202 relevant articles found, 63 were eligible for inclusion; these studies analysed data from 17648 COVID-19 patients. The majority (n=57, 90·5%) were from China and nearly all (n=51, 90·5%) focussed on admitted adult patients. Patients had a median age of 52·5 years and 52·8% were male. The predictors most frequently associated with COVID-19 disease severity were age, absolute lymphocyte count, hypertension, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), C-reactive protein (CRP), and history of any pre-existing medical condition.

Conclusion This study identified multiple variables likely to be predictive of severe COVID-19 illness. Due to the novelty of SARS-CoV-2 infection, there is currently no severity prediction tool designed to, or validated for, COVID-19 illness severity. Findings may inform such a tool that can offer guidance on clinical treatment and disposition, and ultimately reduce morbidity and mortality due to the pandemic.

INTRODUCTION

Despite containment efforts, COVID-19 has reached pandemic status. As of 21 April 2020, there are 2.5 million confirmed cases worldwide, with over 170,000 deaths;1,2 these numbers are only expected to grow in the coming weeks and months. Although data surrounding the novel coronavirus are rapidly evolving, initial estimates depict a dire situation: between 15% and 20% of infections lead to severe or critical disease.2,3 Highly vulnerable populations, compromised by factors such as malnutrition and comorbid diseases, are believed to be at greater risk of developing severe and critical disease.4 Mortality has varied across settings, but early data suggest a case fatality rate ranging from 0.5% to 4.5%.5-8 As COVID-19 spreads, healthcare systems worldwide are being strained.9,10 Early recognition, resuscitation and referral have proven key to effective responses, yielding lower mortality.11 High volumes of patients in need of critical care limit systems’ abilities to provide such care; this is already occurring even in the most highly-resourced settings.9,10 It is increasingly likely that the countries with the most limited capacity to respond will soon be affected on a large scale.12 Many low-resource settings (LRS) have scarce critical care resources, with limitations in the availability of oxygen and other basic resources as well as healthcare provider shortages.13,14 While ongoing acute and emergency care system strengthening efforts are underway and showing impact in many of these settings, these systems will not be able to keep pace with the emerging demand.12 Immediate targeted efforts are needed to assist stressed healthcare systems around the globe in managing and treating large numbers of acutely ill COVID-19 patients.12

Frontline providers in emergency units (EUs) need to make challenging decisions surrounding rationing of resources, including oxygen and ventilators, upon initial assessment of COVID-19 patients. Clinical guidance for evaluating patients’ respiratory needs and subsequent dispositions is essential, particularly in LRS. A range of scoring systems are available to guide care for severely ill patients. While these tools may have some utility in predicting COVID-19 patient severity, they are likely limited in this unique context. Some scores are designed for specific care settings, such as intensive care units (ICUs), a very scarce resource in LRS. 15 While selected COVID-19 patients can be treated in ICUs, most patients are less critical, requiring interventions more appropriate for general ward and EU settings. Thus, a tool predicting outcomes based solely on those already admitted to ICU may have reduced utility across the range of illness severity seen in this disease. Other scoring systems were purpose-designed for patients presenting with specific conditions, such as pneumonia and sepsis.15,16 Condition-specific tools may be of some use in assessing COVID-19 patients but are likely limited in that these patients initially present with a range of symptoms, only some of which involve respiratory disease or septic shock.17 High burdens of data entry seen in many tools can lead to increased time-to-decision making and frequent missing data points.18-20 Some also involve additional investigations, including blood tests and imaging,15,21-23 that have very limited availability in LRS.

In the context of the COVID-19 crisis, a low-input severity scoring tool could be a cornerstone of ensuring timely access to appropriate care and justified use of critically limited resources. In order to identify or develop a severity assessment tool appropriate for COVID-19 patients, factors contributing to, and predictive of, patient severity must first be understood. This study aimed to systematically evaluate existing COVID-19 literature for relationships between historical characteristics and clinical presentations and investigations, and illness severity.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify papers that studied potential associations between demographics, comorbidities, clinical presentations and investigational studies, and COVID-19 illness severity. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were adhered to throughout this process.24

Search strategy and selection criteria

Three online databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched using a combination of free-text phrases and medical subject headings. Results were restricted to those in the English, Spanish, and Mandarin languages, published between 01 December 2019 and 19 April 2020. Search terms related to COVID-19 infection (“NCoV”, “Coronavirus”, “severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2”, “COVID”, “COVID-19”, “Coronavirus infections”) and illness severity (“Severity of Illness Index”, “severity”, “critical”, “critical illness”, “critical care”, “patient admission”, “length of stay”, “outcome”, “morbidity”, “mortality”, “death”, “respiratory insufficiency”, “respiratory distress syndrome, adult”, and “respiration, artificial”) were used in combination with those for demographics (“demographic”, “demographic”, “age”, “sex”, and “gender”), historical features (“comorbidity”, “co-morbidity”), “pre-existing”, and “condition”), clinical presentation (“signs and symptoms”, “symptom”, “characteristic”, “clinical” and, “presentation”), and diagnostic investigations (“investigation”, “laboratory”, “blood test”, “imaging”, “X-ray” and, “CT”). Refer to appendix 1 for full search strategy.

All publications in the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Database of Publications on Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) were also included.25 Reference lists of all texts eligible full texts were reviewed to identify additional relevant literature.

Duplicates were manually removed. All articles were screened for inclusion by two independent reviewers (JLP, KW, SS, AVN), after which a third reviewer (AF, JLP, MB, SS, AVN) retrieved each eligible full-text and considered for inclusion. Two discrepancies in agreement were resolved through discussion.

This study included all full-text manuscripts, both pre-print and published, that provided data on associations between the outcome of interest - disease severity - and demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, vital signs, and/or investigational studies of confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to hospitals. Research-based correspondence pieces were also included, as this is an additional format of rapid research dissemination in the COVID-19 era. Those not directly evaluating primary data, including literature reviews and meta-analyses, were excluded, as were opinion and editorial pieces, case reports, and clinical management guidelines. A range of definitions and parameters of illness severity were considered acceptable as comparator outcomes, including disease severity itself (as defined by the article’s authors), as well as proxy measures for disease severity, such as inpatient mortality and ICU admission 26. Manuscripts that did not include statistical analyses evaluating significance were excluded. There were no restrictions to study design. Studies evaluating exclusively children or pregnant populations were excluded.

Data analysis

Data extracted from each article included author(s); title; countries involved; study population demographics; measure and definition of disease severity; and each presenting symptom, comorbidity, initial vital sign, and investigational study that was statistically assessed against disease severity, along with notation of whether each variable was found to be significantly associated with severity. Variables reported with a p-value ≤0.05 were considered significantly associated with illness severity.

One reviewer (AF, JLP, MB, SH, SS, AVN) extracted data, and second reviewer (AF and JLP) cross-checked all extractions. All extracted variables were documented categorically as ‘significant’, ‘not significant’ or ‘not reported’. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework27 was used to assess quality of and bias in study evidence. Two reviewers (AF and JLP) graded each study, reaching consensus via discussion when necessary.

A descriptive analysis of the number of papers that reported each variable as significantly associated with illness severity was conducted. No tests of statistical significance were conducted.

Patient and public involvement

Given the nature of this review, it was not appropriate to involve patients or the public in this study’s design or execution.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 6202 articles across four databases (Figure 1). Thirty-one relevant publications referenced in the databases’ articles were also found. After removing duplicates, 5770 studies remained; title and abstract screening led to the removal of 5361 (92·9%) of these as they did not meet inclusion criteria. Upon review of 409 full-texts, 350 articles were excluded: 289 (82·6%) did not include significance testing for relevant variables, 55 (15·7%) did not evaluate primary data, and 2 (0·6%) were in a language other than English, Mandarin, or Spanish.

Figure 1.
Figure 1.

PRISMA flow diagram

Sixty-three articles were eligible for inclusion (Table 1). The majority (n=57, 90·5%) were from China; two publications were available from the United States and one each from Italy, France, South Korea, and Singapore. Most publications (n=61, 96·8%) were in English; two (3·2%) were only available in Mandarin. All studies were observational cohort studies; 57 (90·5%) retrospective and six (9·5%) prospective. Due in large part to study design, nearly all (n=62, 98·4%) studies were of low quality. One (1·6%) study was of moderate quality. Together, these studies analysed data from 17648 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 by laboratory technique (PCR or RT-PCR). Sample sizes in these studies ranged from 12 to 4103 patients, with a mean of 280. Of the 58 publications reporting sex, a median 52·8% patients were male. The median age was 52·5 years across 56 reporting studies. Eight publications included both children and adults. Four publications focused on specific populations, including healthcare workers (n=2), and those with cancer (n=1), and cardiovascular disease (n=1); the remaining 59 studies noted no population restrictions. Approximately 41% (n=26) of publications defined illness severity by the National Health Committee of the People’s Republic of China’s (NHC) guidelines (Table 2) 25. Fourteen studies (22·2%) evaluated inpatient mortality, and another six (9·5%) studied ICU admission.

View this table:
Table 1. Study characteristics
View this table:
Table 2. Definitions of illness severity

The most commonly analysed variables in relation to patient severity were age, sex, absolute lymphocyte count, and hypertension. The predictors most frequently associated with COVID-19 disease severity were age, absolute lymphocyte count, hypertension, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), C-reactive protein (CRP), and history of any pre-existing medical condition.

Age was commonly identified as a significant predictor of illness severity (Table 3). The comorbidities most often reported as significant in patients with poorer outcomes were history of any pre-existing medical condition, hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease (Table 3). The presenting symptom most frequently associated with severe disease was dyspnoea or difficulty in breathing (Table 4). All other symptoms, including fever or chills, cough, sputum production, myalgias, and diarrhoea among others, were more frequently not associated with severe disease. Six of ten (60%) studies evaluating respiratory rate for initial vitals found it to be a predictor of severity, and four of five (80%) for SpO2.

View this table:
Table 3. Demographic and historical variables significantly associated with illness severity*
View this table:
Table 4. Clinical presentation variables significantly associated with illness severity*

The most commonly associated laboratory values were absolute lymphocyte count, LDH, CRP, D-dimer, and procalcitonin (Table 5). Among associated laboratory values, PaO2/FiO2,N-terminal b-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and blood glucose were each consistently reported as significant across multiple studies. Abnormal CT was significant in ten of 16 (62·5%) studies, and abnormal chest X-ray in two of four (50%) (Table 5).

View this table:
Table 5. Clinical investigation variables significantly associated with illness severity*

CONCLUSION

The novelty of SARS-CoV-2 infection has led to many hypotheses regarding potentially significant predictors of patient illness. This study aimed to provide clarity around potential predictors by presenting a systematic review of the features most frequently and consistently associated with COVID-19 illness severity. The available literature evaluates a broad range of clinical characteristics and investigations, highlighting variables likely to be significantly associated with illness severity, including age, history of pre-existing medical conditions, dyspnoea on presentation, and a range of blood tests.

In line with several publications,28-30 age was identified as a predictor of illness severity in nearly all studies. However, not all studies addressed confounding in their methodology. It is not clear whether age is an independent predictor for severity due to decreased physiological reserve or if increased rates of comorbidities amongst elderly populations influence its significance. Results suggest that any pre-existing condition may put COVID-19 patients at higher risk of poor outcomes. But, when looking at specific conditions, few comorbidities were found to be consistently significant across the literature. Hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and body mass index (BMI) were found to be significant predictors in the majority of instances where they were evaluated; these should be assessed further in future investigations

In clinical practice, clinical discriminators and vital signs play important roles in determining acuity. Shortness of breath or dyspnoea was the only presenting symptom reported as a significant predictor of severity across these studies. An earlier meta-analysis of COVID-19 data also supports this conclusion.31 Dyspnoea is easy to assess and already being used in many settings for COVID-19 screening,31-33 making it a candidate for potential inclusion in a COVID-19 severity scoring tool. Data on initial vital signs were inconclusive.

Although a large portion of potentially predictive variables depend on blood investigations, these predictors may have limited utility in the initial management of COVID-19 disease, especially in LRS: Faced with scarce time and resources, and overwhelming patient numbers, clinicians around the world are in need of near-immediate indicators of illness severity. Potentially relevant severity calculators such as the Pneumonia Severity Index and CURB-65, require blood investigations and imaging to predict mortality, and are based on non-COVID-19 pneumonia,23,34 limiting their utility in the pandemic.

Due to the novelty of SARS-CoV-2 infection, there are currently no scoring systems validated for COVID-19 illness severity assessment either at the initial point of entry to the healthcare system or during admission. Such a tool could enable rapid classification of patients’ illness severity to determine disposition and resource allocation, aiding overwhelmed healthcare systems facing limited resources. It could assist frontline providers in decision-making surrounding resource allocation, including both the physical - e.g. oxygen and mechanical ventilation - and human resources necessary to oversee such interventions in a timely, appropriate manner for the rapidly increasing volume of COVID-19 patients.

Most LRS already suffered from scarcities of oxygen, mechanical ventilation and ICU beds pre-COVID-19,35 and the current resource constraints seen in highly-resourced settings will likely be even more extreme in LRS.36,37 Ethical allocation of resources is expected to become a necessity in all settings, as providers will have to divide resources across both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients, many of whom will have similar prognoses.38 Though a severity scoring tool may identify a patient’s need for oxygen or mechanical ventilation, broader resource allocation for all patient populations requires ethical frameworks beyond such a tool’s scope. This review’s findings may have utility as components of a COVID-19-specific severity scoring tool that could offer guidance on clinical treatment and disposition, and ultimately reduce morbidity and mortality due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Some discrepancies exist between our findings and calculators currently being used to evaluate COVID-19 patients, namely on the significance of initial vitals, presenting symptoms, laboratory values and imaging findings. Though our findings were inconclusive in regard to initial vitals, one study reported that qSOFA was predictive of COVID-19 illness severity,39 indicating that altered mental status, tachypnoea and systolic blood pressure ≤100mmHg could be predictive in a severity scoring tool. Most pneumonia clinical calculators to predict illness severity rely on laboratory and imaging investigations that were insignificant in our systematic review—aside from glucose, absolute lymphocyte count and PaO2/FiO2—and are not immediately available in most LRS. Various calculators also emphasise sex and pulmonary co-morbidities, which were found to be independently insignificant in our review. The discrepancies between our systematic review and the clinical calculators of illness severity being used in this pandemic warrant a COVID-19 specific-calculator based on the emerging evidence rather than single-institution experience to facilitate illness severity stratification.

Due to the emergent COVID-19 pandemic and need for data to inform responses, rapid efforts are being made to publish any available information. Our review included research-based correspondence and pre-print articles alongside peer-reviewed publications, all of which were in the form of observational cohort studies. However, all studies performed well against GRADE criteria, scoring at least as well as is expected for cohort studies (low quality or above).

An overwhelming majority of studies originated in China; this suggests that there may be increased homogeneity in the data and that results might not be translatable to other settings. It could not be confirmed that none of the publications used populations from the same patient database.

Findings of this study may also be limited in that they are solely descriptive, lacking any testing of statistical significance. Numerous definitions for, and proxy measures of, illness severity were presented in the primary literature included in this review. While this variance may have influenced results, it could not be avoided given the urgency of the COVID-19 pandemic and lack of existing evidence.

This systematic review presents the features most associated with COVID-19 illness severity based on frequency and consistency of reporting publications. These findings could aid frontline providers in determining how to allocate scarce resources, namely oxygen and mechanical ventilation, in a timely and appropriate manner for the rapidly increasing volume of COVID-19 patients around the world, but especially in LRS. It is our hope that by using significant variables such as age, history of comorbidity, and dyspnoea as a presenting symptom, providers in LRS can quickly predict illness severity to guide clinical treatment and disposition of patients with COVID-19 disease. Given the urgency of the pandemic and the almost universally low-quality of data, future research collaborations with larger samples and prospective designs are critical to improving COVID-19 illness severity prediction and subsequent management.

Data Availability

Additional extracted data not provided in-text or as supplementary information are available upon request.

Contributors

LAW, JLP, and MB designed the study. JLP performed the database searches. JLP, KW, SS, and AVN screened articles titles and abstracts for inclusion. AF, JLP, MB, SS and AVN screened eligible full texts for inclusion. AF, JLP, MB, SH, SS, and AVN extracted data. JLP and AF cross-checked all data extractions, assessed quality of included studies, performed data analysis, and drafted the manuscript. All authors contributed to revising the manuscript and have approved of the final version. LAW is the guarantor.

Funding

No funding was received for this study.

Competing interests

None declared.

Data availability statement

Additional extracted data not provided in-text or as supplementary information are available upon request.

Appendix Search strategy

PubMed

Search date: 19/4/20

Restricted to studies published from 1/12/19-19/4/20

Scopus

Search date: 19/4/20

Restricted to studies published from 1/1/19-19/4/20

Web of Science

Search date: 19/4/20

Restricted to studies published from 1/1/19-31/3/20

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    COVID Cases 2020 [Available from: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ accessed 29 March 2020.
  2. 2.↵
    Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020 [Available from: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019 accessed 20 March 2020.
  3. 3.↵
    Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Geneva: World Health Organization, 2020.
  4. 4.↵
    Yang J, Zheng Y, Gou X, et al.Prevalence of comorbidities in the novel Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Infect Dis 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.03.017 [published Online First: 2020/03/17]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    Korean Society of Infectious D, Korean Society of Pediatric Infectious D, Korean Society of E, et al.Report on the Epidemiological Features of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak in the Republic of Korea from January 19 to March 2, 2020. J Korean Med Sci 2020;35(10):e112. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e112 [published Online First: 2020/03/17]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.
    Onder G, Rezza G, Brusaferro S.Case-Fatality Rate and Characteristics of Patients Dying in Relation to COVID-19 in Italy. JAMA 2020 doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.4683 [published Online First: 2020/03/24]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.
    Yang S, Cao P, Du P, et al.Early estimation of the case fatality rate of COVID-19 in mainland China: a data-driven analysis. Ann Transl Med 2020;8(4):128.doi: 10.21037/atm.2020.02.66 [published Online First: 2020/03/17]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 66. Geneva World Health Organization 2020.
  9. 9.↵
    Lai S, Bogoch I, Watts A, et al. Preliminary risk analysis of 2019 novel coronavirus spread within and beyond China., 2020.
  10. 10.↵
    Liew MF, Siow WT, MacLaren G, et al.Preparing for COVID-19: early experience from an intensive care unit in Singapore. Crit Care 2020;24(1):83.doi: 10.1186/s13054-020-2814-x [published Online First: 2020/03/11]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    Sun Q, Qiu H, Huang M, et al.Lower mortality of COVID-19 by early recognition and intervention: experience from Jiangsu Province. Ann Intensive Care 2020;10(1):33.doi: 10.1186/s13613-020-00650-2 [published Online First: 2020/03/20]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    Gilbert M, Pullano G, Pinotti F, et al.Preparedness and vulnerability of African countries against importations of COVID-19: a modelling study. Lancet 2020;395(10227):871–77.doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30411-6 [published Online First: 2020/02/24]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    Chavula C, Pigoga JL, Kafwamfwa M, et al. A cross-sectional evaluation of emergency care capacity at public hospitals in Zambia 2018.
  14. 14.↵
    Bitter CC, Rice B, Periyanayagam U, et al.What resources are used in emergency departments in rural sub-Saharan Africa? A retrospective analysis of patient care in a district-level hospital in Uganda. BMJ Open 2018;8(2):e019024.doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019024 [published Online First: 2018/02/27]
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    Lambden S, Laterre PF, Levy MM, et al.The SOFA score-development, utility and challenges of accurate assessment in clinical trials. Crit Care 2019;23(1):374.doi: 10.1186/s13054-019-2663-7 [published Online First: 2019/11/30]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  16. 16.↵
    Lim WS, van der Eerden MM, Laing R, et al.Defining community acquired pneumonia severity on presentation to hospital: an international derivation and validation study. Thorax 2003;58(5):377–82.doi: 10.1136/thorax.58.5.377 [published Online First: 2003/05/03]
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    Adhikari SP, Meng S, Wu YJ, et al.Epidemiology, causes, clinical manifestation and diagnosis, prevention and control of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) during the early outbreak period: ascoping review. Infect Dis Poverty 2020;9(1):29.doi: 10.1186/s40249-020-00646-x [published Online First: 2020/03/19]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    Afessa B, Keegan MT, Gajic O, et al.The influence of missing components of the Acute Physiology Score of APACHE III on the measurement of ICU performance. Intensive Care Med 2005;31(11):1537–43.doi: 10.1007/s00134-005-2751-9 [published Online First: 2005/10/06]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. 19.
    Jentzer JC, Bennett C, Wiley BM, et al.Predictive value of individual Sequential Organ Failure Assessment sub-scores for mortality in the cardiac intensive care unit. PLoS One 2019;14(5):e0216177.doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216177 [published Online First: 2019/05/21]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. 20.↵
    Lo R, Leung LY, Brabrand M, et al.qSOFA is a Poor Predictor of Short-Term Mortality in All Patients: A Systematic Review of 410,000 Patients. Journal of clinical medicine 2019;8(1):61. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8010061
    OpenUrl
  21. 21.↵
    Yandiola PPE, Capelastegui A, Quintana J, et al.Prospective comparison of severity scores for predicting clinically relevant outcomes for patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia. Chest 2009;135(6):1572–79.doi: 10.1378/chest.08-2179 [published Online First: 2009/01/15]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  22. 22.
    Charles PG, Wolfe R, Whitby M, et al.SMART-COP: a tool for predicting the need for intensive respiratory or vasopressor support in community-acquired pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 2008;47(3):375–84.doi: 10.1086/589754 [published Online First: 2008/06/19]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  23. 23.↵
    Kim MA, Park JS, Lee CW, et al.Pneumonia severity index in viral community acquired pneumonia in adults. PLoS One 2019;14(3):e0210102.doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210102 [published Online First: 2019/03/07]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. 24.↵
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al.Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg 2010;8(5):336–41.doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007 [published Online First: 2010/02/23]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    Database of publications on coronavirus disease (COVID-19) Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020 [Available from: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/global-research-on-novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov accessed 03/30/2020.
  26. 26.↵
    Twomey M, Wallis LA, Myers JE.Limitations in validating emergency department triage scales. Emerg Med J 2007;24(7):477–9.doi: 10.1136/emj.2007.046383 [published Online First: 2007/06/22]
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al.GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008;336(7650):924–6.doi: 10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD [published Online First: 2008/04/26]
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    Liu K, Chen Y, Lin R, et al.Clinical features of COVID-19 in elderly patients: A comparison with young and middle-aged patients. J Infect 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.03.005 [published Online First: 2020/03/17]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  29. 29.
    Shi Y, Yu X, Zhao H, et al.Host susceptibility to severe COVID-19 and establishment of a host risk score: findings of 487 cases outside Wuhan. Crit Care 2020;24(1):108.doi: 10.1186/s13054-020-2833-7 [published Online First: 2020/03/20]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    Chen J, Qi T, Liu L, et al.Clinical progression of patients with COVID-19 in Shanghai, China. J Infect 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.03.004 [published Online First: 2020/03/17]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    ICNARC report on COVID-19 in critical care London: Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre 2020.
  32. 32.
    Lin M, Beliavsky A, Katz K, et al.What can early Canadian experience screening for COVID-19 teach us about how to prepare for a pandemic? CMAJ 2020 doi: 10.1503/cmaj.200305 [published Online First: 2020/03/08]
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    Clinical management of severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) when COVID-19 disease is suspected. Interim guidance, 13 March 2020. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2020.
  34. 34.↵
    Macfarlane J. CURB-65 Score for Pneumonia Severity 2020 [Available from: https://www.mdcalc.com/curb-65-score-pneumonia-severity.
  35. 35.↵
    Krishnamoorthy V, Vavilala MS, Mock CN.The need for ventilators in the developing world: An opportunity to improve care and save lives. J Glob Health 2014;4(1):010303.doi: 10.7189/jogh.04.010303 [published Online First: 2014/07/01]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  36. 36.↵
    Ginsburg AS, Van Cleve WC, I. W. Thompson Iwm, et al.Oxygen and Pulse Oximetry in Childhood Pneumonia: A Survey of Healthcare Providers in Resource-limited Settings. Journal of Tropical Pediatrics 2011;58(5):389–93.doi: 10.1093/tropej/fmr103
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. 37.↵
    Murthy S, Leligdowicz A, Adhikari NK.Intensive Care Unit Capacity in Low-Income Countries: A Systematic Review. PLoS One 2015;10(1)doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0116949
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    Emanuel EJ, Persad G, Upshur R, et al.Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in the Time of Covid-19. N Engl J Med 2020 doi: 10.1056/NEJMsb2005114 [published Online First: 2020/03/24]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    Zhou F, Yu T, Du R, et al.Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2020 doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30566-3 [published Online First: 2020/03/15]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.
    Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, et al.Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet 2020;395(10223):497–506.doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30183-5 [published Online First: 2020/01/28]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.
    Peng YD, Meng K, Guan HQ, et al.[Clinical characteristics and outcomes of 112 cardiovascular disease patients infected by 2019-nCoV]. Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi 2020;48(0):E004.doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112148-20200220-00105 [published Online First: 2020/03/04]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  42. 42.
    Liu Y, Yang Y, Zhang C, et al.Clinical and biochemical indexes from 2019-nCoV infected patients linked to viral loads and lung injury. Sci China Life Sci 2020;63(3):364–74.doi: 10.1007/s11427-020-1643-8 [published Online First: 2020/02/13]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.
    Zheng H, Zhang M, Yang C, et al.Elevated exhaustion levels and reduced functional diversity of T cells in peripheral blood may predict severe progression in COVID-19 patients. Cell Mol Immunol 2020 doi: 10.1038/s41423-020-0401-3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. 44.
    Lei C, Huiguo L, Wei L, et al.Analysis of clinical characteristics of 29 cases of new type coronavirus pneumonia. Chinese Journal of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases 2020 doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1001-0939.2020.0005
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. 45.
    Min L, Min L, Peng H, et al.Analysis of clinical characteristics of 30 cases of new coronavirus pneumonia in medical staff. Chinese Journal of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases 2020;43doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1001-0939.2020.0016
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  46. 46.
    Zhou B, She J, Wang Y, et al.The clinical characteristics of myocardial injury in severe and very severe patients with 2019 Novel Coronavirus Disease. Journal of Infection 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.03.021
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  47. 47.
    Gao Y, Li T, Han M, et al.Diagnostic Utility of Clinical Laboratory Data Determinations for Patients with the Severe COVID-19. J Med Virol 2020 doi: 10.1002/jmv.25770 [published Online First: 2020/03/18]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  48. 48.
    Shen C, Yu N, Cai S, et al.Quantitative computed tomography analysis for stratifying the severity of Coronavirus Disease 2019. Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.jpha.2020.03.004
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  49. 49.
    Zhou W, Zhong Z, Xie X.Relation between chest CT findings and clinical conditions of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pneumonia: A multicenter study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2020;3doi: 10.2214/AJR.20.22976
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. 50.
    Liang W, Guan W, Chen R, et al.Cancer patients in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a nationwide analysis in China. Lancet Oncol 2020;21(3):335–37.doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30096-6 [published Online First: 2020/02/19]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. 51.
    Yuan M, Yin W, Tao Z, et al.Association of radiologic findings with mortality of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. PLoS One 2020;15(3):e0230548.doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230548 [published Online First: 2020/03/20]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  52. 52.
    Liu JL, Y., Xiang P, Pu L, et al.Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio predicts severe illness patients with 2019 Novel Coronavirus in the early stage. MedRxiv 2020 doi: 10.1101/2020.02.10.20021584
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  53. 53.
    Wang Z, Yang B, Li Q, et al.Clinical Features of 69 Cases with Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Wuhan, China. Clin Infect Dis 2020 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa272 [published Online First: 2020/03/17]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. 54.
    Fan BE, Chong VCL, Chan SSW, et al.Hematologic parameters in patients with COVID-19 infection. Am J Hematol 2020 doi: 10.1002/ajh.25774 [published Online First: 2020/03/05]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  55. 55.
    Liu W, Tao ZW, Lei W, et al.Analysis of factors associated with disease outcomes in hospitalized patients with 2019 novel coronavirus disease. Chin Med J (Engl) 2020 doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000000775 [published Online First: 2020/03/03]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  56. 56.
    Cao J, Hu X, Cheng W, et al.Clinical features and short-term outcomes of 18 patients with corona virus disease 2019 in intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 2020 doi: 10.1007/s00134-020-05987-7 [published Online First: 2020/03/04]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  57. 57.
    Li K, Wu J, Wu F, et al.The Clinical and Chest CT Features Associated with Severe and Critical COVID-19 Pneumonia. Invest Radiol 2020 doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000672 [published Online First: 2020/03/03]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  58. 58.
    Ruan Q, Yang K, Wang W, et al.Clinical predictors of mortality due to COVID-19 based on an analysis of data of 150 patients from Wuhan, China. Intensive Care Med 2020 doi: 10.1007/s00134-020-05991-x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. 59.
    Wan S, Xiang Y, Fang W, et al.Clinical features and treatment of COVID-19 patients in northeast Chongqing. J Med Virol 2020 doi: 10.1002/jmv.25783 [published Online First: 2020/03/22]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  60. 60.
    Wang D, Hu B, Hu C, et al.Clinical Characteristics of 138 Hospitalized Patients With 2019 Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia in Wuhan, China. JAMA 2020 doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.1585 [published Online First: 2020/02/08]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  61. 61.
    Zhang JJ, Dong X, Cao YY, et al.Clinical characteristics of 140 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan, China. Allergy 2020 doi: 10.1111/all.14238 [published Online First: 2020/02/23]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  62. 62.
    Mo P, Xing Y, Xiao Y, et al.Clinical characteristics of refractory COVID-19 pneumonia in Wuhan, China. Clin Infect Dis 2020 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa270 [published Online First: 2020/03/17]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  63. 63.
    Tang N, Li D, Wang X, et al.Abnormal coagulation parameters are associated with poor prognosis in patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia. J Thromb Haemost 2020;18(4):844–47.doi: 10.1111/jth.14768 [published Online First: 2020/02/20]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  64. 64.
    Wu C, Chen X, Cai Y, et al.Risk Factors Associated With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Death in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pneumonia in Wuhan, China. JAMA Intern Med 2020 doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.0994 [published Online First: 2020/03/14]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  65. 65.
    Tian S, Hu N, Lou J, et al.Characteristics of COVID-19 infection in Beijing. J Infect 2020;80(4):401–06.doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.02.018 [published Online First: 2020/03/01]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  66. 66.
    Qin C, Zhou L, Hu Z, et al.Dysregulation of immune response in patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China. Clin Infect Dis 2020 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa248 [published Online First: 2020/03/13]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  67. 67.
    Cheng Y, Luo R, Wang K, et al.Kidney disease is associated with in-hospital death of patients with COVID-19. Kidney International 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.kint.2020.03.005
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  68. 68.
    Tang N, Bai H, Chen X, et al.Anticoagulant treatment is associated with decreased mortality in severe coronavirus disease 2019 patients with coagulopathy. J Thromb Haemost 2020 doi: 10.1111/jth.14817
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  69. 69.
    Wu J, Li W, Shi X, et al.Early antiviral treatment contributes to alleviate the severity and improve the prognosis of patients with novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). J Intern Med 2020 doi: 10.1111/joim.13063 [published Online First: 2020/03/29]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  70. 70.
    Wan Y, Li J, Shen L, et al.Enteric involvement in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 outside Wuhan. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020 doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30118-7 [published Online First: 2020/04/19]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  71. 71.
    Gao L, Jiang D, Wen XS, et al.Prognostic value of NT-proBNP in patients with severe COVID-19. Respir Res 2020;21(1):83.doi: 10.1186/s12931-020-01352-w [published Online First: 2020/04/16]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  72. 72.
    Zheng F, Tang W, Li H, et al.Clinical characteristics of 161 cases of corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Changsha. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2020;24(6):3404–10.doi: 10.26355/eurrev_202003_20711 [published Online First: 2020/04/10]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  73. 73.
    Cai Q, Huang D, Yu H, et al.Characteristics of Liver Tests in COVID-19 Patients. J Hepatol 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2020.04.006 [published Online First: 2020/04/17]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  74. 74.
    Du RH, Liang LR, Yang CQ, et al.Predictors of Mortality for Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia Caused by SARS-CoV-2: A Prospective Cohort Study. Eur Respir J 2020 doi: 10.1183/13993003.00524-2020 [published Online First: 2020/04/10]
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  75. 75.
    Chen T, Dai Z, Mo P, et al.Clinical characteristics and outcomes of older patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China (2019): a single-centered, retrospective study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2020 doi: 10.1093/gerona/glaa089 [published Online First: 2020/04/13]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  76. 76.
    Feng Y, Ling Y, Bai T, et al.COVID-19 with Different Severity: A Multi-center Study of Clinical Features. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2020 doi: 10.1164/rccm.202002-0445OC [published Online First: 2020/04/11]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  77. 77.
    He R, Lu Z, Zhang L, et al.The clinical course and its correlated immune status in COVID-19 pneumonia. Journal of Clinical Virology 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104361
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  78. 78.
    Ji D, Zhang D, Xu J, et al.Prediction for Progression Risk in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia: the CALL Score. Clin Infect Dis 2020 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa414 [published Online First: 2020/04/10]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  79. 79.
    Li X, Xu S, Yu M, et al.Risk factors for severity and mortality in adult COVID-19 inpatients in Wuhan. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2020.04.006 [published Online First: 2020/04/16]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  80. 80.
    C C, JT Y, N Z, et al.Analysis of myocardial injury in patients with COVID-19 and association between concomitant cardiovascular diseases and severity of COVID-19. Chinese Medical Journal 2020;6(48)doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112148-20200225-00123
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  81. 81.
    Wang X, Fang J, Zhu Y, et al.Clinical characteristics of non-critically ill patients with novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) in a Fangcang Hospital. Clin Microbiol Infect 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.03.032 [published Online First: 2020/04/07]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  82. 82.
    Zhou Y, Zhang Z, Tian J, et al.Risk factors associated with disease progression in a cohort of patients infected with the 2019 novel coronavirus. Ann Palliat Med 2020 doi: 10.21037/apm.2020.03.26 [published Online First: 2020/04/03]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  83. 83.
    Cao J, Tu WJ, Cheng W, et al.Clinical Features and Short-term Outcomes of 102 Patients with Corona Virus Disease 2019 in Wuhan, China. Clin Infect Dis 2020 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa243 [published Online First: 2020/04/03]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  84. 84.
    Chu J, Yang N, Wei Y, et al.Clinical characteristics of 54 medical staff with COVID-19: A retrospective study in a single center in Wuhan, China. J Med Virol 2020 doi: 10.1002/jmv.25793 [published Online First: 2020/03/31]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  85. 85.
    Li Y-K, Peng S, Li L-Q, et al. Clinical and Transmission Characteristics of Covid-19, Äî A Retrospective Study of 25 Cases from a Single Thoracic Surgery Department. Curr Med Sci 2020;30:1–6.doi: 10.1007/s11596-020-2176-2
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  86. 86.
    Al-Rousan N, Al-Najjar H.Data Analysis of Coronavirus CoVID-19 Epidemic in South Korea Based on Recovered and Death Cases. J Med Virol 2020 doi: 10.1002/jmv.25850 [published Online First: 2020/04/10]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  87. 87.
    Lighter J, Phillips M, Hochman S, et al.Obesity in patients younger than 60 years is a risk factor for Covid-19 hospital admission. Clinical Infectious Diseases 2020 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa415
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  88. 88.
    Petrilli C, Jones S, Yang J, et al. Factors associated with hospitalization and critical illness among 4,103 patients with COVID-19 disease in New York City. 2020 doi: 10.1101/2020.04.08.20057794
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  89. 89.
    Deng Q, Hu B, Zhang Y, et al.Suspected myocardial injury in patients with COVID-19: Evidence from front-line clinical observation in Wuhan, China. Int J Cardiol 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.03.087 [published Online First: 2020/04/16]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  90. 90.
    Lei S, Jiang F, Su W, et al.Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing surgeries during the incubation period of COVID-19 infection. EClinicalMedicine 2020:100331.doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100331 [published Online First: 2020/04/16]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  91. 91.
    Chen R, Liang W, Jiang M, et al.Risk factors of fatal outcome in hospitalized subjects with coronavirus disease 2019 from a nationwide analysis in China. Chest 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.04.010 [published Online First: 2020/04/19]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  92. 92.
    Wang L, He WB, Yu XM, et al.[Prognostic value of myocardial injury in patients with COVID-19]. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi 2020;56(0):E009.doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112148-20200313-00202 [published Online First: 2020/04/15]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  93. 93.
    Qian ZP, Mei X, Zhang YY, et al. [Analysis of baseline liver biochemical parameters in 324 cases with novel coronavirus pneumonia in Shanghai area]. Zhonghua Gan Zang Bing Za Zhi 2020;28(0):E005.doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20200229-00076 [published Online First: 2020/04/10]
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  94. 94.
    Simonnet A, Chetboun M, Poissy J, et al.High prevalence of obesity in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2020 doi: 10.1002/oby.22831 [published Online First: 2020/04/10]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  95. 95.
    Grasselli G, Zangrillo A, Zanella A, et al.Baseline Characteristics and Outcomes of 1591 Patients Infected With SARS-CoV-2 Admitted to ICUs of the Lombardy Region, Italy. JAMA 2020 doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.5394 [published Online First: 2020/04/07]
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  96. 96.
    Yun L, Lin Y, Qian Z, et al.Clinical analysis on risk factors for COVID-19 patients becoming severe patients. Chinese Journal of Infectious Diseases 2020;38doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn311365-20200211-00055
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  97. 97.
    Niu S, Tian S, Lou J, et al.Clinical Characteristics of Older Patients Infected with COVID-19: A Descriptive Study. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2020.104058
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  98. 98.
    Interpretation of pneumonia diagnosis and treatment plan for new coronavirus infection (trial version 5): National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China [Available from: http://bgs.satcm.gov.cn/zhengcewenjian/2020-02-06/12848.html.
Back to top
Posted April 27, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email
Clinical and historical features associated with severe COVID-19 infection: a systematic review
JL Pigoga, A Friedman, M Broccoli, S Hirner, AV Naidoo, S Singh, K Werner, LA Wallis
medRxiv 2020.04.23.20076653; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.23.20076653
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools

Subject Area