A systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence and impact of coronary artery disease in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Background: COVID-19 accounts for more than half a billion deaths globally. The clinical manifestations may vary in due course. Despite several studies aimed at determining the extent to which the disease's severity and mortality remain high when combined with other comorbidities, more research is required. Therefore, this review aimed to measure the pooled prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) among COVID-19 patients, specifically those with a history of CAD. Additionally, we aim to assess the association between mortality due to CAD and the severity of COVID-19 among hospitalized patients. Method: A comprehensive search in PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and the WHO COVID-19 database was conducted. English studies with original data on CAD, mortality, and ARDS among COVID-19 patients were included. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Results: Among the 2007 identified articles, 76 studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of CAD among COVID-19 patients was 14.4%(95% CI: 12.7-16.2). The highest prevalence was observed in European studies at 18.2%(95% CI: 13.3-24.2), while the lowest was in Asian studies at 10.4% (95% CI: 6.4-16.3). Participants with concurrent CAD at the time of hospital admission had twice the odds of mortality due to COVID-19 (2.64 [95% CI: 2.30-3.04]) with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 45%, p < 0.01). Hospitalized COVID-19 patients with CAD had a 50% higher risk of ARDS (95% CI: 0.62-3.66), but this difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Although our analysis revealed evidence for a relationship between concurrent CAD at the time of hospital admission and mortality from COVID-19, however, global variation in health infrastructure, limitations of data reporting, and the effects of emerging variants must be considered in future investigations.

Cost-effectiveness of population-based screening for oral cancer in India: an economic modelling study.

Background: Oral cancer screening reduces mortality associated with oral cancer. The current study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of commonly used screening techniques, namely conventional oral examination (COE), toluidine blue staining (TBS), oral cytology (OC), and light-based detection (LBD) in the Indian scenario. Methods: The study used a Markov modelling approach to estimate the cost and health outcomes of four different approaches (COE, TBS, OC, and LBD) for screening oral cancer over time from a societal perspective. The discount rate was assumed as 3%. The outcomes estimated were oral cancer incident cases, deaths averted, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). To address the high burden of risk factors (tobacco and/or alcohol) in India, two Markov models were developed: Model A adopted a mass-screening strategy, whereas Model B adopted a high-risk screening strategy versus no screening. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was undertaken to address any parameter uncertainty. Findings: Mass-screening using LBD at three years had the least incident cases (3271.68) and averted the maximum number of oral cancer deaths (459.76). High-risk screening using COE at ten years interval incurred the least lifetime cost of 2,292,816.21 US$ (182,794,468.26 INR). The high-risk strategies (US$/QALY), namely COE 5 years (-29.21), COE 10 years (-90.68), TBS 10 years (-60.54), and LBD 10 years (-13.51), were dominant over no-screening. Interpretation: The most cost-saving approach was the conventional oral examination at an interval of 10 years for oral screening in high-risk populations above 30 years of age. Funding: Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of India.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Screening of Lip and Oral Cavity Cancers or Potentially Malignant Disorders (PMD) by Frontline Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oral cancer screening strategies help reduce associated mortality and could be performed by a trained frontline health worker (FHW). The present review aims to assess the diagnostic accuracy of commonly used screening modalities for oral cancer performed by FHW in apparently healthy individuals. METHODS: Electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, were searched. The review included studies conducted where apparently healthy adult individuals were screened by the FHW for cancer or PMD of the lip and oral cavity by any of the four commonly used techniques - Conventional Oral Examination (COE), toluidine blue staining (TBS), Oral Cytology (OC), and Chemiluminescent Illumination (CLI). FINDINGS: A total of 2,413 potentially relevant articles were retrieved from the search, among which five studies for COE were included in the review. Four out of those five studies were done before the year 2000. None of the studies fitted the inclusion criteria for TBS, OC, and CLI. Pooled sensitivity of oral screening by COE performed by an FHW (n=5) was 88.8% (95% CI: 71.6-96.1), whereas pooled specificity was 91.9% (95% CI: 78.3-97.3). On subgroup analysis, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of studies where the prevalence of disease was <50% (n=4) was 84.5% (95% CI: 62.6 - 94.7) and 94.1% (95% CI: 82.2 - 98.2), respectively. INTERPRETATION: COE by trained FHW had high pooled sensitivity and specificity for screening of oral cancer and PMDs. The screening techniques TBS, OC, and CLI, were not studied for mass screening by trained FHW. COE by trained FHW could be utilized for oral screening in limited-resource settings. However, the FHW should be sufficiently trained to get the desired benefits of early detection. FUNDING: Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of India.

Portable X-ray Fluorescence as a Rapid Determination Tool to Detect Parts per Million Levels of Ni, Zn, As, Se, and Pb in Human Toenails: A South India Case Study.

Chronic exposure to inorganic pollutants adversely affects human health. Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) is the most common method used for trace metal(loid) analysis of human biomarkers. However, it leads to sample destruction, generation of secondary waste, and significant recurring costs. Portable X-ray fluorescence (XRF) instruments can rapidly and nondestructively determine low concentrations of metal(loid)s. In this work, we evaluated the applicability of portable XRF as a rapid method for analyzing trace metal(loid)s in toenail samples from three populations (n = 97) near the city of Chennai, India. A Passing-Bablok regression analysis of results from both methods revealed that there was no proportional bias among the two methods for nickel (measurement range ∼25 to 420 mg/kg), zinc (10 to 890 mg/kg), and lead (0.29 to 4.47 mg/kg). There was a small absolute bias between the two methods. There was a strong proportional bias (slope = 0.253, 95% CI: 0.027, 0.614) between the two methods for arsenic (below detection to 3.8 mg/kg) and for selenium when the concentrations were lower than 2 mg/kg. Limits of agreement between the two methods using Bland-Altman analysis were derived for nickel, zinc, and lead. Overall, a suitably calibrated and evaluated portable XRF shows promise in making high-throughput assessments at population scales.