| Literature DB >> 35719753 |
Isabelle Sanders1, Philip Stather2, Pavithira Sivagangan1, Wissam Al-Jundi2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) generates a cytokine storm that predisposes patients to systemic complications including arterial thrombosis (AT) and acute limb ischaemia (ALI). This study reviews our understanding of the incidence and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 who develop AT.Entities:
Keywords: acute limb ischaemia; arterial thrombosis; covid-19; embolectomy; thrombectomy
Year: 2022 PMID: 35719753 PMCID: PMC9203266 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.25080
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cureus ISSN: 2168-8184
Figure 1Patients with positive COVID-19 and reason for referral to vascular services.
SMV, superior mesenteric vein; AVF, arteriovenous fistula thrombosis; AE, aortoesophageal fistula; CAS, carotid artery stenosis; AA, aortic aneurysm; CTLI, chronic threatening limb ischaemia; AT, arterial thrombosis.
Figure 2CT angiography findings of thrombus location.
Demographics and comorbidities of patients admitted with arterial thrombosis and positive COVID-19.
| Demographics | Mean (range) or No. (%) |
| Age | 72 (49-92) |
| Females | 8 (53%) |
| Diabetes mellitus (DM) | 4 (27%) |
| Atrial fibrillation/aortic valve replacement | 6 (40%) |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)/asthma | 4 (27%) |
| Ischaemic heart disease (IHD) | 2 (13%) |
| Hypertension (HT) | 2 (13%) |
| Chronic kidney disease (CKD) | 2 (13%) |
Summary of limb amputation or death in COVID-19 patients with the presence of acute limb ischaemia.
| 30-day outcome | No. (%) (n = 14) |
| Mortality | 8 (57%) |
| Amputation | 2 (14%) |
| Amputation-free survival | 4 (29%) |
Figure 3Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram.
Summary and characteristics of the nine studies included in this systematic review.
| Name of paper | No. of participants (+ve COVID-19 + arterial events) | Arterial thrombosis (%) (arterial events (AE)/acute limb ischaemia (ALI)/arterial thrombotic event (ATE)) | Amputation | Amputation-free survival rate | Mortality rate |
| Bellosta et al. [ | 20 | 1 patient | 55% (11/20) | 40% (8) | |
| Goldman et al. [ | 16 | 100% (16/16; 16 patients with ALI and COVID-19 +ve) (94% of thrombi were proximal) | 4 patients | 37.5% (6/16) | 38% (6) |
| Ilonzo et al. [ | 16 | 76.2% (16/21; 21 patients with acute thrombotic events and COVID-19 +ve, 15 ATE) | 4 patients | 56.3% (9/16) | 33.3% (5) |
| Indes et al. [ | 13 | 32.5% (13/40; 40 patients with arterial thrombus, 13 COVID-19 +ve and peripheral ATE) | 4 patients | 15% (2/13) | 40% (7) |
| Mascia et al. [ | 12 | 38.7% (12/31; 31 patients with acute limb ischaemia, 12 COVID-19 +ve patients) | 2 patients | 83.3% (10/12) | 12.5% |
| Sánchez et al. [ | 30 | 9 patients | 60% (18/30) | 23.3% (7) | |
| Tan et al. [ | 13 | 12.0% arterial thrombotic events in ICU (13/108; 108 all patients inc. no thrombotic events, 13 ATE), 65.0% arterial thrombotic events in ICU (13/20; 20 patients with a thrombotic event and COVID-19 +ve, 13 ATE) | Odds ratio: 4.450 | ||
| Al Raizah et al. [ | 14 | 8.4% arterial events in ICU (inc. no thrombotic events), 2.2% (14/636; 636 patients COVID-19 +ve, 14 AE), 53.8% (14/26; 26 patients with thrombotic events and COVID-19 +ve, 14 AE) | |||
| Gonzalez-Fajardo et al. [ | 13 | 12.3% (13/106; 106 patients with vascular thrombosis and COVID-19 +ve, 13 peripheral arterial thromboses) | 1 patient | 23.1% (3/13) | 36% (9/25) |
| Total | 147 participants | 25/47 17% | 47.1% on average | 31.9% on average |
Quality assessment of individual case series.
U/C, unclear.
| Were there clear criteria for inclusion in the case series? | Was the condition measured in a standard, reliable way for all participants included in the case series? | Were valid methods used for identification of the condition for all participants included in the case series? | Did the case series have consecutive inclusion of participants? | Did the case series have the complete inclusion of participants? | Was there clear reporting of the demographics of the participants in the study? | Was there clear reporting of clinical information of the participants? | Were the outcomes or follow up results of cases clearly reported? | Was there clear reporting of the presenting site(s)/clinic(s) demographic information? | Was statistical analysis appropriate? | Total | |
| Bellosta et al. (2020) [ | No | U/C | U/C | Yes | U/C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 6 |
| Goldman et al. (2020) [ | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 8 |
| Ilonzo et al. (2020) [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| Indes et al. (2021) [ | U/C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 9 |
| Mascia et al. 2020 [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| Sánchez et al. (2021) [ | N | N | Yes | Yes | U/C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 7 |
| Tan et al. (2021) [ | N | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 9 |
| Al Raizah et al. (2021) [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| Gonzalez-Fajardo et al. (2020) [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 10 |
Figure 4Percentage of case series that received a "yes", "no", or "unclear" for each section in the quality assessment.
The number of case series is labelled within the bar.