Literature DB >> 32882393

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the COVID-19 associated liver injury.

Yu Jun Wong1, Malcolm Tan2, Qishi Zheng3, James Weiquan Li2, Rahul Kumar4, Kwong Ming Fock5, Eng Kiong Teo2, Tiing Leong Ang2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND
OBJECTIVES: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected more than 5 million people globally. Data on the prevalence and degree of COVID-19 associated liver injury among patients with COVID-19 remain limited. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the prevalence and degree of liver injury between patients with severe and non-severe COVID-19.
METHODS: We performed a systematic search of three electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library), from inception to 24th April 2020. We included all adult human studies (>20 subjects) regardless of language, region or publication date or status. We assessed the pooled odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) using the random-effects model.
RESULTS: Among 1543 citations, there were 24 studies (5961 subjects) which fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The pooled odds ratio for elevated ALT (OR = 2.5, 95%CI: 1.6-3.7, I2 = 57%), AST (OR = 3.4, 95%CI: 2.3-5.0, I2 = 56%), hyperbilirubinemia (OR = 1.7, 95%CI: 1.2-2.5, I2 = 0%) and hypoalbuminemia (OR = 7.1, 95%CI: 2.1-24.1, I2 = 71%) were higher subjects in critical COVID-19.
CONCLUSION: COVID-19 associated liver injury is more common in severe COVID-19 than non-severe COVID-19. Physicians should be aware of possible progression to severe disease in subjects with COVID-19-associated liver injury.
Copyright © 2020 Fundación Clínica Médica Sur, A.C. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Alanine Transaminase; Aspartate Aminotransferases; Liver Disease; SARS-CoV-2 infection

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32882393      PMCID: PMC7458067          DOI: 10.1016/j.aohep.2020.08.064

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Hepatol        ISSN: 1665-2681            Impact factor:   3.388


Introduction

The novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected more than 5 million patients globally, causing more than 300,000 death to date [1]. The symptoms of COVID-19 range from mild respiratory symptoms to acute respiratory distress syndrome with multiorgan failure and death, particularly among the elderly with multiple comorbidities. Extra-pulmonary symptoms such as COVID-19 associated liver injury has been reported [[2], [3], [4]]. COVID-19 associated liver injury is defined as any liver damage in patients with COVID-19, with or without the pre-existing liver disease [5]. The possible mechanisms of COVID-19 associated liver injury include immune-mediated damage and ischemic hepatitis secondary systemic inflammatory response syndrome in severe COVID-19, drug-induced liver injury, as well as reactivation of underlying chronic liver disease [6]. Besides, the direct virus-induced cytopathic effect has also been postulated as a result of viral replication within the infected hepatocytes [7]. The data on the prevalence and severity of COVID-19 associated liver injury are conflicting. While growing evidence suggested a higher incidence of liver injury among severe COVID-19, such findings are not consistent [[8], [9], [10]]. Recent position statement highlighted our gaps in understanding this novel disease [[11], [12], [13]]. In particular, patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease may have co-existing comorbidities which put them at a higher risk of severe COVID-19 [11]. Furthermore, COVID-19 associated liver injury is associated with prolonged hospitalization [6]. Given this premise, it is of scientific interest to expand our understanding of the clinical outcome of patients with COVID-19 associated liver injury. However, the severity of COVID-19 patients was often poorly defined by including subjects ranging from tachypnea to intubation or death. As the literature in COVID-19 is expanding exponentially, keeping up-to-date with scientific progress has become increasingly challenging for physicians. Therefore, we systematically reviewed and summarized the existing literature on COVID-19 associated liver injury among adult patients. Our meta-analysis aims to compare the risks and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 associated liver injury among adults with severe and non-severe COVID-19.

Methods

Objective

The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the risk and clinical outcome of COVID-19 associated liver injury between COVID-19 patients with severe and non-severe COVID-19.

Types of participants

We included all adults with COVID-19 associated liver disease, regardless of their underlying chronic liver disease or the severity of COVID-19. Only studies that report outcome data between severe and non-severe COVID-19 were included, regardless of the pattern or the severity of the liver injury.

Study Outcomes

Our primary outcome was the pooled risk of serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevation in adult patients with severe and non-severe COVID-19. Our secondary outcomes were the pooled risk of the following parameters in adult patients with severe and non-severe COVID-19: (1) serum aspartate aminotransferase (AST) elevation, (2) hyperbilirubinemia and (3) hypoalbuminemia. We also assessed the pooled mean difference (MD) of Gamma-Glutamyl transferase (GGT) from the included studies. We defined the elevation of serum ALT or AST as levels beyond 40 U/L. We defined hyperbilirubinemia as total bilirubin level higher than 17 mmol/L. We defined hypoalbuminemia as serum albumin level below 40 g/L.

Search strategy

We conducted a comprehensive search of three electronic databases, PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library (earliest inception to 24th April 2020). Keywords used in the search included a combination of “Coronavirus disease 2019”, “COVID19”, “SARS-CoV-2” and “Coronavirus infection/complications [MESH]". We restricted our search to adult human studies. An experienced medical librarian helped with our literature search. In addition, we manually searched all references of selected articles for additional relevant articles. We used PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) to report all studies identified using a pre-defined search protocol detailed in Appendix 1.

Study selection

In this meta-analysis, we included all studies that met the following inclusion criteria: (1) population: adult patients infected with the COVID-19, (2) reported outcome data on liver enzymes derangement (3) reported outcome data on the risk or severity of liver injury between severe and non-severe COVID-19. All studies, regardless of language, geography, publication dates or publication status are included so long as they provided data relevant to this analysis. Our exclusion criteria were: Any study with subjects < 21 years old, Case report or case series with less than 20 subjects, Review articles, editorial and guidelines. Severe COVID-19 was defined based on the definition used in the respective study. We further defined subjects as “critical COVID-19” based on the need for admission to the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, or death. Three authors (MT, JL, RK) independently reviewed all titles and abstracts of the studies identified in the primary search. Studies that were duplicates or did not address the research question based on pre-defined criteria were excluded. We subsequently reviewed the full texts of all remaining articles to determine if they contained relevant information. Any discrepancy in the article selection was resolved by consensus with a co-author (WYJ).

Data extraction

We extracted data on the demographic of study populations (age, gender, sample size, the proportion of subjects with baseline chronic liver disease and the use of Lopinavir/ritonavir) as well as the pattern of COVID-19 associated liver injury (ALT, AST, bilirubin, albumin and GGT) from all included studies. The data from each study were independently extracted by into a standardized form by two authors (WYJ, RK). We contact the corresponding author through email for any missing data. We did not encounter multiple reports from the same author or study population in this meta-analysis.

Risk of Bias assessment

All included studies were independently reviewed by 2 authors (MT, JL) to assess for quality and risk of bias using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort studies [14]. The scoring consist of 8 questions: representation of average adult in community (Population-based study = 1 point ; multicenter = 0.5 point; single center = 0 point); cohort size (more than 100 subjects = 1 point, between 50 to 99 subjects = 0.5 point, fewer than 50 subjects = 0 point); reported information on percentages and pattern of liver injury (information with clarity = 1 point, information derived from percentages = 0.5 point, unclear = 0); reported percentages of subjects with chronic liver disease at baseline (yes = 1 point, no = 0 point); assessed factors between mild and severe COVID-19 (yes = 1, no = 0); adequate clinical assessment (yes = 1, no = 0), sufficient follow-up period for outcome to occur (yes = 1 point, unclear = 0 point); adequate follow-up (all subjects were followed-up = 1 point, > 50% subjects were followed-up = 0.5 points, < 50% subjects were followed-up = 0 point). The final decision on the overall risk of bias was made through discussion. All differences were resolved by discussions with third author (WYJ). We considered studies with a score of ≥6, 3-4, < 3 as high-quality, medium-quality and low-quality, respectively.

Statistical analysis

We used Review Manager Software version 5.3 (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014) to perform our meta-analysis to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (95%CI). We used the random-effects model and validated our results using sensitivity analysis and heterogeneity assessment across the included studies. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. The statistical heterogeneity was evaluated using the I statistics. We defined substantial heterogeneity across study as low, moderate, substantial and considerable with a I value of <30%, 31% to 60%, 61% to 74% and > 75% [15]. We performed subgroup analysis among subjects with critical COVID-19 (defined as subjects needing admission to intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, or death) to minimize the impact of heterogeneity in the definition of severe COVID-19 on our results. As case-control studies are generally considered to have a higher risk of bias and more susceptible to selection and recall bias [16], we performed subgroup analysis based on study design (cohort study versus case-control study).

Results

Search results and population characteristics

From an initial total of 1543 citations identified by using our search strategy, we identified a total of 112 studies. Of these, 89 were excluded for the following reasons: no outcome data reported (n = 44), case report or case series fewer than 20 subjects (n = 25), review article (n = 18) and pediatric study (n = 2). We manually search the references of all the included studies and included one additional study [10]. A total of 24 studies met our inclusion criteria [10,[17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39]]. (Fig. 1 ).
Fig. 1

PRISMA Flowchart.

PRISMA Flowchart.

Characteristics and quality of the studies

The characteristics of all included studies are presented in Table 1 . Most studies were retrospective (15 case-control studies and 8 cohort studies) in nature except for one prospective cohort study [24]. Seven studies reported multicenter data, while the remaining reported single-center data. All studies were from Asia. The definition of severe COVID-19 was heterogeneous across all the included studies. The commonest definition of severe COVID-19 was based on clinical criteria (n = 15), followed by death (n = 5) and ICU admission (n = 3). All studies were published as a full manuscript. Overall, seven studies were considered to be of high quality, while the rest were considered to be medium quality (Supplementary Table 1).
Table 1

Characteristics of included studies.

NoAuthor, yearCountrySample sizeAge (Median/IQR)Male (n, %)Definition of Severe DiseaseLopinavir/ritonavir (%)Baseline CLD (%)Liver injury (%)Non-severeSevere
1Cai Q, 2020Shenzhen, China41747 (34-60)48Clinical80576225192
2Cao J, 2020Wuhan, China10254 (37-67)52Death27.52338517
3Cao W, 2020Xiangyang, China128NR47ClinicalNRNRNR10721
4Chen G, 2020Wuhan, China2156 (50-65)81ClinicalNRNR291011
5Chen T, 2020Wuhan, China27462 (44-70)62Death8045161113
6Deng Y, 2020Wuhan, China225Recovered: 40, Death 6955DeathNRNRNR116109
7Du R, 2020Wuhan, China109*70.7 (10.9)68ICUNR2465851
8Guan W, 2020China109947 (35-58)58ClinicalNR222926173
9Huang C, 2020Wuhan, China4149 (41-58)73ICUNR2372813
10Jin X, 2020Zhejiang, China651*45.2 (14.4)51Clinical8941057774
11Lian J, 2020Zhejiang, China78844.8 (13.4)52Clinical27.341071078
12Liu W, 2020Wuhan, China7838 (33-57)50Clinical30.8NRNR6711
13Mo P, 2020Wuhan, China15554 (42-66)56Clinical17.45NR7085
14Wan S, 2020Chongqing, China13547 (36-55)53Clinical1002NR9540
15Wang D, 2020Wuhan, China13856 (42-68)54ICUNR3NR10236
16Wang Z, 2020Wuhan, China6942 (35-62)46ClinicalNR1335514
17Wu C, 2020Wuhan, China20151 (43-60)64ARDS1543084117
18Xu X, 2020Zhejiang, China6241 (32-52)56Clinical8911162933
19Yang X, 2020Wuhan, China52*59.7 (13.3)67Death13.5NR293220
20Zhang G, 2020Wuhan, China9549 (39-58)56ClinicalNRNR556332
21Zhang X, 2020Zhejiang, China654*45.3 (14.3)50ImagingNR41272573
22Zhang Y, 2020Wuhan, China115*49.5 (17.1)43ClinicalNRNR158431
23Zheng F, 2020Changsha, China16145 (34-57)50ClinicalNR31413130
24Zhou F, 2020China19156 (46-67)62Death21NR3113754

Abbreviations: *mean (SD); NR = not reported; CLD = chronic liver disease; CT = computer tomography; NR = Not reported.

Characteristics of included studies. Abbreviations: *mean (SD); NR = not reported; CLD = chronic liver disease; CT = computer tomography; NR = Not reported. Twenty-four studies, with a total of 5952 patients (4024 in the severe group and 1928 in the non-severe group), were included in the final analysis [10,[17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39]]. The patients' characteristics were detailed in Table 1. The median age of subjects ranged from 38 to 71 years-old. The proportion of male ranged from 43% to 81%. The proportion of subjects with admission to an intensive care unit ranged from 1% to 100%. The prevalence of baseline chronic liver disease was low (ranged from 1% to 11%) [[17], [18],20,[22], [23], [24], [25], [26],[28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33],36,38]. The liver injury occurred in 5%-76% of subjects with COVID-19 [[17], [18], [19], [20],[22], [23], [24], [25], [26],[31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39]].

Study Outcome

Serum Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT)

Twenty-three studies (5900 subjects) reported outcome data on ALT [10,[17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33],[35], [36], [37], [38], [39]]. The mean level of ALT is higher in severe COVID-19 when compared to non-severe group (31.9 U/L vs 23.5 U/L, 95%CI = 5.3-12.8, p < 0.001), with high heterogeneity (I = 99%, p < 0.001) (Supplementary Table 2 ). The pooled risk of ALT elevation was higher in severe COVID-19 with moderate heterogeneity (OR = 2.8, 95%CI: 1.8-4.3, I = 63%) (Table 2). When the stratified analysis was performed within the subgroup of patients with critical COVID-19, the pooled risk of ALT elevation remained higher among subjects with critical COVID-19, with less heterogeneity (OR = 2.5, 95%CI = 1.6-3.7, I = 57%) (Fig. 2 ).
Table 2

Subgroup analysis.

OutcomeSubgroupsNo. of studiesEffect size (Odds ratio / mean difference)I2
ALT elevation (>40 U/L)Overall82.8 (1.8-4.3)63
Critical COVID-1972.5 (1.6-3.7)57
Lopinavir/ritonavir usageHigh usage (≥ 80%)14.6 (2.5-8.6)NA
Low usage (< 80%)72.5 (16-3.9)56
Cohort62.5 (1.5-4.2)66
Case-control24.4 (1.4-13.4)55
AST elevation (>40 U/L)Overall93.4 (2.3-5.1)59
Critical COVID-1973.4 (2.3-5.0)56
Non-survivor15.9 (3.4-10.5)NA
Lopinavir/ritonavir usageHigh usage (≥ 80%)33.3 (1.6-6.8)53
Low usage (< 80%)63.5 (2.1-5.9)66
Cohort53.3 (2.0-5.3)70
Case-control43.7 (1.7-8.4)49
Hyperbilirubinemia (>17 mmol/L)Overall31.9 (1.1-3.1)30
Critical COVID-1921.7 (1.2-2.5)0
Lopinavir/ritonavir usageHigh usage (≥ 80%)12.0 (1.2-3.5)NA
Low usage (< 80%)22.2 (0.6-7.7)61
Cohort21.7 (1.1-2.5)0
Case-control15.2 (1.2-23.2)NA
Hypoalbuminemia (<40 g/L)Overall38.8 (4.1-19.0)46
Critical COVID-1927.1 (2.1-24.1)71
Lopinavir/ritonavir usageHigh usage (≥ 80%)0NANA
Low usage (< 80%)38.8 (4.1-19.0)46
Cohort27.1 (2.1-24.1)71
Case-control113.1 (3.7-46.4)NA
GGT levelOverall346.7 (-4.1-97.6)96
Critical COVID-19236.6 (-5.2 -78.4)100
Lopinavir/ritonavir usageHigh usage (≥ 80%)198.5 (75.3-121.6)NA
Low usage (< 80%)215.3 (13.7-16.8)0
Cohort256 (-25 - 137.6)98
Case-control128.4 (2.1-54.8)NA

Abbreviation: ALT = Alanine Aminotransferase; AST = Aspartate aminotransferase; GGT = Gamma-Glutamyl Transferase; NA = Not available.

Fig. 2

Pooled odds for ALT elevation in critical COVID-19.

Subgroup analysis. Abbreviation: ALT = Alanine Aminotransferase; AST = Aspartate aminotransferase; GGT = Gamma-Glutamyl Transferase; NA = Not available. Pooled odds for ALT elevation in critical COVID-19.

Serum Aspartate aminotransferase (AST)

Twenty-one (5292 subjects) reported outcome data on AST [10,17,[19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33],[35], [36], [37], [38]]. The mean level of AST is higher in severe COVID-19 when compared to non-severe group (35.1 U/L vs 26.6 U/L, 95%CI = 8.7-14.2, p < 0.001), with high heterogeneity (I = 99%, p < 0.001) (Supplementary Table 2). The pooled risk of AST elevation was higher in severe COVID-19 with moderate heterogeneity (OR = 3.4 95%CI: 2.3-5.1, I = 59%) (Table 2). Stratified analysis among subjects with critical COVID-19 showed a higher pooled risk of AST elevation, with less heterogeneity (OR = 3.4, 95%CI: 2.3-5.0, I 2 = 56%) (Fig. 3 ). One study reported a higher risk of AST elevation in non-survivor (OR = 5.9, 95%CI = 3.4-10.5, p < 0.001) (Table 2). [20]
Fig. 3

Pooled odds for AST elevation in critical COVID-19.

Pooled odds for AST elevation in critical COVID-19.

Serum bilirubin

Thirteen studies (3540 subjects) reported outcome data on serum bilirubin [17,[19], [20],[23], [24], [25], [26],29,32,30,[36], [37], [38]]. The mean level of bilirubin is higher in severe COVID-19 when compared to non-severe group (12.2 mmol/L vs 10.5 mmol/L, 95%CI = 1.5-3.5, p < 0.001), with high heterogeneity (I = 98%, p < 0.001) (Supplementary Table 2). The pooled risk of hyperbilirubinemia (serum bilirubin > 17 mmol/L) is higher in subjects with severe (OR = 1.9, 95%CI: 1.1-3.1, I = 30%) (Table 2) and critical COVID-19 (OR = 1.7, 95%CI: 1.2-2.5, I = 0%) (Fig. 4 ).
Fig. 4

Pooled odds for hyperbilirubinemia in critical COVID-19.

Pooled odds for hyperbilirubinemia in critical COVID-19.

Serum albumin

Thirteen studies (3404 subjects) reported outcome data on serum albumin [[19], [20],[24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29],32,[36], [37],39]. The mean level of albumin is lower in severe COVID-19 when compared to non-severe group (37.2 G/L vs 40.1 G/L, 95%CI= -6.0, -2.9, p < 0.001), with high heterogeneity (I = 100%, p < 0.001) (Supplementary Table 2). The pooled risk of hypoalbuminemia (serum albumin <40 g/L) was higher in subjects with severe COVID-19 (OR = 8.8, 95%CI: 4.1-19.0, I = 46%) and critical COVID-19 (OR = 7.1, 95%CI: 2.1-24.1, I = 71%) (Table 2).

Serum Gamma-Glutamyl Transferase (GGT)

Three studies (699 subjects) reported outcome data on serum GGT [17,20,37]. There is a trend towards higher GGT is higher in severe COVID-19 (68.5 U/L vs 36.8 U/L, p = 0.07) and critical COVID-19 (56.9 U/L vs 28.5 U/L, p < 0.001), with high heterogeneity (I = 96% and 100% respectively, p < 0.001) (Supplementary Table 2). The mean difference of GGT did not significantly differ in subjects with severe or critical COVID-19 as compared to non-severe/non-critical COVID-19 patients (Table 2).

Subgroup analysis

We performed a subgroup analysis based on the types of studies and the proportion of subjects with Lopinavir/ritonavir usage. We performed a subgroup analysis based on study design by comparing a cohort study and case-control study. We found that the effect size for the case-control study was bigger as compared to cohort study for ALT elevation, AST elevation, hyperbilirubinemia and hypoalbuminemia (Table 2). The proportion of subjects using Lopinavir/ritonavir (ranged from 14% to 100%) was reported in 12 studies [[17], [18],20,[25], [26], [27], [28], [29],[32], [33], [34],38]. We arbitrarily defined high Lopinavir/ritonavir usage as a study with ≥ 80% of their subjects treated with Lopinavir/ritonavir. Among the four studies with high Lopinavir/ritonavir usage [17,25,29,33], we observed a higher pooled odds risk for ALT and GGT elevation (Table 2) when compared to studies with low Lopinavir/ritonavir usage. When the analysis was stratified among subjects with critical COVID-19, high Lopinavir/ritonavir usage group had a higher level of ALT (41.5 U/L vs 36.9 U/L, p < 0.001) and bilirubin (16.7 mmol/L vs 14.0 mmol/L, p < 0.001) as compared to low Lopinavir/ritonavir usage group (Supplementary Table 4).

Validation of meta-analysis results

Sensitivity analysis

We performed a sensitivity analysis to assess whether an individual study had a dominant effect on the overall pooled results. This was performed by serially removing one study at a time while repeating the analysis. The pooled risk of ALT elevation ranged from 2.2 to 2.8, which is still within our reported 95%CI. Besides, we also performed repeated analysis using the fixed-effect model. Using the fixed-effect model, the level of GGT is higher in severe COVID-19 as compared to non-severe group (MD = 14.6, 95%CI: 14.1-17.2, I = 96%). All the remaining findings were similar in the sensitivity analysis (Supplementary Table 2).

Heterogeneity

We assessed heterogeneity based on the percentages of I 2 for each reported outcome. We consider the heterogeneity on the observed risk and severity of COVID-19 associated liver injury as moderate and substantial, respectively. This heterogeneity is likely the result of a different definition of severe disease used in various studies.

Publication bias

There was no evidence of publication bias based on visual inspection of the funnel plot (Fig. 5 ).
Fig. 5

Funnel plot.

Funnel plot.

Discussion

COVID-19 associated liver injury is defined as any liver damage in COVID-19 patients, with or without the pre-existing liver disease [5]. While the exact mechanism remains unknown, several potential mechanisms have been postulated [[6], [7], [8], [9]]. Severe systemic inflammatory response during severe COVID-19 can lead to immune-mediated damage or ischemic hepatitis from the severe systemic inflammatory response. Current treatment options such as Lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine and Remdesivir are potentially hepatotoxic and may cause drug-induced liver injury (DILI) [11]. Other immunosuppressive alternative such as tocilizumab or steroid can result in reactivation of underlying chronic hepatitis B. While direct cytotoxicity due to viral replication within infected hepatocytes has been postulated, viral inclusions for SARS-COV-2 has not been found in the liver [40]. The current data on the severity and prevalence of COVID-19 associated liver injury remains conflicting due to the heterogeneity in study populations. To address these issues, we systematically reviewed the current literature on liver injury in COVID-19 and performed a meta-analysis on the severity and risk of COVID-19 associated liver injury in these patients. At the point when this meta-analysis was conducted, most studies did not specifically report the prevalence of COVID-19 patients with baseline chronic liver disease. None of the included studies reported outcomes of COVID-19 patients based on their underlying liver disease. As all included studies reported a low incidence of chronic liver disease (CLD), our findings will be more reflective of the general population. Our findings were consistent with current literature that adult patients with severe COVID-19 have a higher risk of liver injury. Most liver injuries were mild. To date, there is only one reported case of death from liver failure in COVID-19 patients without pre-existing liver disease. In a recently published international registry of COVID-19 among patients with chronic liver disease, only 12% of death was attributed to liver disease [41]. That having said, the mortality risk among patients with the pre-existing liver disease did increase with the severity of underlying liver disease (13% in chronic liver disease, 24% in Child-Pugh’s A cirrhosis, 43% in Child-Pugh’s B cirrhosis and 63% in Child-Pugh C cirrhosis) [41]. Based on our analysis, the pooled OR of ALT elevation was 2.5, AST elevation was 3.4, and hyperbilirubinemia was 1.7 among COVID-19 patients who were critically ill. We found that indirect markers for liver injury, such as hypoalbuminemia increased by seven-fold in patients with severe COVID-19. While we are mindful that hypoalbuminemia could be confounded by factors such as systemic inflammation, malnutrition and the timing of presentation to hospital, similar findings were reported in other studies [[42], [43]]. Therefore, physicians should be alert about potential clinical deterioration (intubation, ICU admission and death) when COVID-19 associated liver injury was observed. In this meta-analysis, the pooled risk of liver injury was higher among studies with high usage of Lopinavir/ritonavir. In a recent retrospective study involving 417 COVID-19 patients [17], Lopinavir/ritonavir was associated with 7-fold higher risk of liver injury. In this meta-analysis, we found a higher level of GGT and ALT elevation in studies with high Lopinavir/ritonavir usage, suggesting that Lopinavir/ritonavir might be hepatotoxic (Table 2). Although Lopinavir/ritonavir did not significantly increase the risk of liver injury in a recent open-labelled randomized trial, this trial excluded subjects with abnormal baseline liver functions. We are unable to exclude preferential treatment of severe COVID-19 patients using Lopinavir/ritonavir from this meta-analysis. Based on our findings, physicians may consider monitor for liver injury when Lopinavir/ritonavir is being used for COVID-19 patients. While it was postulated that SARS-COV-2 can bind to ACE-2 positive cholangiocytes, elevation in cholestatic markers such as GGT is rarely reported in COVID-19. We observed a trend of higher GGT level among subjects with critical COVID-19. However, due to limited published literature on GGT in COVID-19, a statistical significance was not achieved, further studies are required to shed light on this. This meta-analysis adds value to the current literature by summarizing the prevalence and pattern of liver injury in adults with severe COVID-19. Prior to this, the prevalence of COVID-19 associated liver injury was confounded by the heterogeneity of study population, and study design as pertinent information such as the proportion of subjects’ baseline chronic liver disease or ICU admission were often not reported [5]. In this meta-analysis, we found that the severity of most COVID-19 associated liver injury was considered mild, suggesting liver failure is uncommon among critical COVID-19. Nevertheless, physicians should be mindful of potential deterioration among COVID-19 patients liver injury as it is associated with ICU admission, mechanical ventilation and death. There are several strengths in our meta-analysis. To our best knowledge, this is the most comprehensive description of the liver manifestation of COVID-19 in comparison. Earlier meta-analysis had either included fewer studies evaluating liver manifestation among COVID-19 patients [[43], [44], [45], [46], [47], [48], [49]] or included a wide range of “severe” COVID-19 patients ranging from the presence of tachypnoea to death [[43], [44], [45], [46]]. In this meta-analysis, we conducted a systematic search of the literature using a pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria; including a large number of studies to allow assessment of publication bias and subgroup analysis, detailed extraction of data on study outcomes; subgroup analysis to define a more homogenous study population for sensitivity analysis; rigorous evaluation of study quality; and the use of various statistical methods to evaluate the validity of our findings. Our meta-analysis was limited by the heterogeneity in the study population of included studies. We attempted to mitigate this limitation by performing subgroup analysis based on the characteristics of each study. Most of the included studies were limited by their retrospective nature of study design and small sample size. Because of this, we cannot estimate the incidence and comparative risk of drug-induced liver injury across different treatment with high confidence. While liver injury is more likely to occur in adults with critical COVID-19, we cannot be certain of its prognostic value as most of the studies were retrospective in nature. In conclusion, COVID-19 associated liver injury is generally mild. As liver injuries are more common in patients with severe COVID-19, physicians should be mindful about the potential risk of clinical deterioration in these patients.

AUTHORS CONTRIBUTION

All authors worked in all 4 aspects of authorship as per ICJME guidelines.

Funding

We declare that there is no funding support for this study

Conflict of interest

All authors declared no conflict of interest pertaining to this work

KEY SUMMARY

COVID-19 associated liver injury is generally mild. The commonest liver injury associated with COVID-19 is hypoalbuminemia (OR = 7.1) followed by elevated AST (OR = 3.4) and ALT (OR = 2.5) COVID-19 associated liver injury is common in patients requiring intensive care, mechanical ventilation and death. Physicians should be mindful about the potential risk of clinical deterioration in these patients.
SearchQueryItems found
#1Search "COVID-19" Filters: Abstract; Humans562
#2Search “Coronavirus disease 2019” Filters: Abstract; Humans148
#3Search “SARS-CoV-2” Filters: Abstract; Humans200
#4Search ((("COVID-19" AND hasabstract[text] AND Humans[Mesh])) OR (“Coronavirus disease 2019” AND hasabstract[text] AND Humans[Mesh])) OR (“SARS-CoV-2” AND hasabstract[text] AND Humans[Mesh]) Filters: Abstract; Humans565
#5Search "COVID19" Filters: Abstract; Humans7
#6Search (((((("COVID-19" AND hasabstract[text] AND Humans[Mesh])) OR (“Coronavirus disease 2019” AND hasabstract[text] AND Humans[Mesh])) OR (“SARS-CoV-2” AND hasabstract[text] AND Humans[Mesh])) AND hasabstract[text] AND Humans[Mesh])) OR ("COVID19" AND hasabstract[text] AND Humans[Mesh]) Filters: Abstract; Humans565
  45 in total

1.  Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

Authors:  Miranda Cumpston; Tianjing Li; Matthew J Page; Jacqueline Chandler; Vivian A Welch; Julian Pt Higgins; James Thomas
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-10-03

2.  Clinical Characteristics of 138 Hospitalized Patients With 2019 Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia in Wuhan, China.

Authors:  Dawei Wang; Bo Hu; Chang Hu; Fangfang Zhu; Xing Liu; Jing Zhang; Binbin Wang; Hui Xiang; Zhenshun Cheng; Yong Xiong; Yan Zhao; Yirong Li; Xinghuan Wang; Zhiyong Peng
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Clinical Features and Short-term Outcomes of 102 Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Wuhan, China.

Authors:  Jianlei Cao; Wen-Jun Tu; Wenlin Cheng; Lei Yu; Ya-Kun Liu; Xiaorong Hu; Qiang Liu
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2020-07-28       Impact factor: 9.079

4.  Clinical findings in a group of patients infected with the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-Cov-2) outside of Wuhan, China: retrospective case series.

Authors:  Xiao-Wei Xu; Xiao-Xin Wu; Xian-Gao Jiang; Kai-Jin Xu; Ling-Jun Ying; Chun-Lian Ma; Shi-Bo Li; Hua-Ying Wang; Sheng Zhang; Hai-Nv Gao; Ji-Fang Sheng; Hong-Liu Cai; Yun-Qing Qiu; Lan-Juan Li
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2020-02-19

5.  Epidemiological, clinical characteristics of cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection with abnormal imaging findings.

Authors:  Xiaoli Zhang; Huan Cai; Jianhua Hu; Jiangshan Lian; Jueqing Gu; Shanyan Zhang; Chanyuan Ye; Yingfeng Lu; Ciliang Jin; Guodong Yu; Hongyu Jia; Yimin Zhang; Jifang Sheng; Lanjuan Li; Yida Yang
Journal:  Int J Infect Dis       Date:  2020-03-20       Impact factor: 3.623

6.  Clinical Features of COVID-19-Related Liver Functional Abnormality.

Authors:  Zhenyu Fan; Liping Chen; Jun Li; Xin Cheng; Jingmao Yang; Cheng Tian; Yajun Zhang; Shaoping Huang; Zhanju Liu; Jilin Cheng
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2020-04-10       Impact factor: 11.382

7.  Epidemiological, clinical and virological characteristics of 74 cases of coronavirus-infected disease 2019 (COVID-19) with gastrointestinal symptoms.

Authors:  Xi Jin; Jiang-Shan Lian; Jian-Hua Hu; Jianguo Gao; Lin Zheng; Yi-Min Zhang; Shao-Rui Hao; Hong-Yu Jia; Huan Cai; Xiao-Li Zhang; Guo-Dong Yu; Kai-Jin Xu; Xiao-Yan Wang; Jue-Qing Gu; Shan-Yan Zhang; Chan-Yuan Ye; Ci-Liang Jin; Ying-Feng Lu; Xia Yu; Xiao-Peng Yu; Jian-Rong Huang; Kang-Li Xu; Qin Ni; Cheng-Bo Yu; Biao Zhu; Yong-Tao Li; Jun Liu; Hong Zhao; Xuan Zhang; Liang Yu; Yong-Zheng Guo; Jun-Wei Su; Jing-Jing Tao; Guan-Jing Lang; Xiao-Xin Wu; Wen-Rui Wu; Ting-Ting Qv; Dai-Rong Xiang; Ping Yi; Ding Shi; Yanfei Chen; Yue Ren; Yun-Qing Qiu; Lan-Juan Li; Jifang Sheng; Yida Yang
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2020-03-24       Impact factor: 23.059

8.  Analysis of Epidemiological and Clinical Features in Older Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outside Wuhan.

Authors:  Jiangshan Lian; Xi Jin; Shaorui Hao; Huan Cai; Shanyan Zhang; Lin Zheng; Hongyu Jia; Jianhua Hu; Jianguo Gao; Yimin Zhang; Xiaoli Zhang; Guodong Yu; Xiaoyan Wang; Jueqing Gu; Chanyuan Ye; Ciliang Jin; Yingfeng Lu; Xia Yu; Xiaopeng Yu; Yue Ren; Yunqing Qiu; Lanjuan Li; Jifang Sheng; Yida Yang
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2020-07-28       Impact factor: 9.079

9.  Longitudinal Association Between Markers of Liver Injury and Mortality in COVID-19 in China.

Authors:  Fang Lei; Ye-Mao Liu; Feng Zhou; Juan-Juan Qin; Lihua Zhu; Peng Zhang; Xiao-Jing Zhang; Jingjing Cai; Lijin Lin; Shan Ouyang; Xiaoming Wang; Chengzhang Yang; Xu Cheng; Weifang Liu; Haomiao Li; Jing Xie; Bin Wu; Huiming Luo; Fei Xiao; Jing Chen; Liang Tao; Gang Cheng; Zhi-Gang She; Jianghua Zhou; Haitao Wang; Jun Lin; Pengcheng Luo; Shouzhi Fu; Jihui Zhou; Ping Ye; Bing Xiao; Weiming Mao; Liming Liu; Youqin Yan; Ling Liu; Guohua Chen; Hongliang Li; Xiaodong Huang; Bing-Hong Zhang; Yufeng Yuan
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 17.298

10.  Characteristics of and Important Lessons From the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak in China: Summary of a Report of 72 314 Cases From the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

Authors:  Zunyou Wu; Jennifer M McGoogan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-04-07       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  14 in total

1.  How reliable are the multiple comparison methods for odds ratio?

Authors:  Ayfer Ezgi Yilmaz
Journal:  J Appl Stat       Date:  2022-07-26       Impact factor: 1.416

Review 2.  Liver injury in the era of COVID-19.

Authors:  Halina Cichoż-Lach; Agata Michalak
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-02-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 3.  COVID-19 and liver dysfunction: Epidemiology, association and potential mechanisms.

Authors:  Min Du; Song Yang; Min Liu; Jue Liu
Journal:  Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-08-21       Impact factor: 2.947

Review 4.  COVID-19 and the liver: A brief and core review.

Authors:  Bircan Kayaaslan; Rahmet Guner
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2021-12-27

5.  Liver abscess with necrosis in post COVID-19: A case report.

Authors:  Aldrich Kurniawan Liemarto; Bernadus Parish Budiono; Melissa Angela Chionardes; Ivona Oliviera; Anindita Rahmasiwi
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2021-11-23

Review 6.  Liver injury with COVID-19: laboratory and histopathological outcome-systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sherine A Mohammed; Khalid M Eid; Felix Emeka Anyiam; Hazem Wadaaallah; Muhamed Ahmed Mahmoud Muhamed; Maha Hosni Morsi; Nesrine Ben Hadj Dahman
Journal:  Egypt Liver J       Date:  2022-01-21

7.  Viral Coinfection among COVID-19 Patient Groups: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Pooneh Malekifar; Reza Pakzad; Ramin Shahbahrami; Milad Zandi; Ali Jafarpour; Sara Akhavan Rezayat; Samaneh Akbarpour; Alireza Namazi Shabestari; Iraj Pakzad; Elahe Hesari; Abbas Farahani; Saber Soltani
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-09-03       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 8.  Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors, chronic liver diseases, common medications, and clinical outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 patients.

Authors:  Wattana Leowattana
Journal:  World J Virol       Date:  2021-05-25

9.  Liver dysfunction and SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Authors:  Abraham Edgar Gracia-Ramos; Joel Omar Jaquez-Quintana; Raúl Contreras-Omaña; Moises Auron
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Clinical significance of prognostic nutrition index in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: Results from single-center experience with systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sina Rashedi; Mohammad Keykhaei; Marzieh Pazoki; Haleh Ashraf; Atabak Najafi; Samira Kafan; Niloufar Peirovi; Farhad Najmeddin; Seyed Aboozar Jazayeri; Mehdi Kashani; Reza Shariat Moharari; Mahnaz Montazeri
Journal:  Nutr Clin Pract       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 3.204

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.