PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Lopez-Leon, Sandra
AU  - Wegman-Ostrosky, Talia
AU  - Perelman, Carol
AU  - Sepulveda, Rosalinda
AU  - Rebolledo, Paulina A
AU  - Cuapio, Angelica
AU  - Villapol, Sonia
TI  - More than 50 Long-term effects of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis
AID  - 10.1101/2021.01.27.21250617
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2021.01.27.21250617
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/01/29/2021.01.27.21250617.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/01/29/2021.01.27.21250617.full
AB  - COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, can involve sequelae and other medical complications that last weeks to months after initial recovery, which has come to be called Long-COVID or COVID long-haulers. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify studies assessing long-term effects of COVID-19 and estimates the prevalence of each symptom, sign, or laboratory parameter of patients at a post-COVID-19 stage. LitCOVID (PubMed and Medline) and Embase were searched by two independent researchers. All articles with original data for detecting long-term COVID-19 published before 1st of January 2021 and with a minimum of 100 patients were included. For effects reported in two or more studies, meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed using the MetaXL software to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviewers and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed. A total of 18,251 publications were identified, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of 55 long-term effects was estimated, 21 meta-analyses were performed, and 47,910 patients were included. The follow-up time ranged from 15 to 110 days post-viral infection. The age of the study participants ranged between 17 and 87 years. It was estimated that 80% (95% CI 65-92) of the patients that were infected with SARS-CoV-2 developed one or more long-term symptoms. The five most common symptoms were fatigue (58%), headache (44%), attention disorder (27%), hair loss (25%), and dyspnea (24%). All meta-analyses showed medium (n=2) to high heterogeneity (n=13). In order to have a better understanding, future studies need to stratify by sex, age, previous comorbidities, severity of COVID-19 (ranging from asymptomatic to severe), and duration of each symptom. From the clinical perspective, multi-disciplinary teams are crucial to developing preventive measures, rehabilitation techniques, and clinical management strategies with whole-patient perspectives designed to address long COVID-19 care.Competing Interest StatementConflict of interest statement SLL is an employee of Novartis Pharmaceutical Company; the statements presented in the paper do not necessarily represent the position of the company. The remaining authors have no competing interests to declare. Funding StatementThis work was supported by grant R21NS106640 from National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), and funds from Houston Methodist Research Institute, Houston, TX.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:No IRBAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe systematic review followed the Preferred reporting Items for Systematic Reviewers and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.All data analyzed this is study is publicly available directly from published studies cited in the manuscript