Summary: The disease course of COVID‐19 varies from asymptomatic infection to critical condition leading to mortality. Identification of prognostic factors is important for prevention and early treatment. We aimed to examine whether obesity is a risk factor for the critical condition in COVID‐19 patients by performing a meta‐analysis. The review protocol was registered onto PROSPERO (CRD42020185980). A systematic search was performed in five scientific databases between 1 January and 11 May 2020. After selection, 24 retrospective cohort studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses. We calculated pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in meta‐analysis. Obesity was a significant risk factor for intensive care unit (ICU) admission in a homogenous dataset (OR = 1.21, CI: 1.002‐1.46; I2 = 0.0%) as well as for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) (OR = 2.05, CI: 1.16‐3.64; I2 = 34.86%) in COVID‐19. Comparing body mass index (BMI) classes with each other, we found that a higher BMI always carries a higher risk. Obesity may serve as a clinical predictor for adverse outcomes; therefore, the inclusion of BMI in prognostic scores and improvement of guidelines for the intensive care of patients with elevated BMI are highly recommended.

Objective: A higher BMI has become acknowledged as one of the important risk factors for developing critical condition in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). In addition to BMI, body composition, and particularly visceral adiposity, might be an even more accurate measure to stratify patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the association between the distributions of computed‐tomography‐quantified fat mass and critical condition of patients with COVID‐19.Methods: A systematic search was conducted in five databases for studies published until November 17, 2020. In the meta‐analysis, pooled mean difference (standardized mean difference [SMD]) of visceral fat area (VFA; in square centimeters) was calculated between patients in the intensive care unit and those in general ward and between patients with the requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and those without the IMV requirement.Results: The quantitative synthesis revealed that patients requiring intensive care had higher VFA values (SMD = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.20‐0.71, P < 0.001) compared with patients on the general ward. Similarly, patients requiring IMV had higher VFA values (SMD = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.05‐0.71, P = 0.026) compared with patients without the IMV requirement.Conclusions: VFA values were found to be significantly higher in patients with critical condition. Therefore, abdominal adiposity seems to be a risk factor in COVID‐19, and patients with central obesity might need special attention.

Despite the growing knowledge of the clinicopathological features of COVID-19, the correlation between early changes in the laboratory parameters and the clinical outcomes of patients is not entirely understood. In this study, we aimed to assess the prognostic value of early laboratory parameters in COVID-19. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis based on the available literature in five databases. The last search was on July 26, 2020, with key terms related to COVID-19. Eligible studies contained original data of at least ten infected patients and reported on baseline laboratory parameters of patients. We calculated weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals. 93 and 78 studies were included in quantitative and qualitative syntheses, respectively. Higher baseline total white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), lactate-dehydrogenase (LDH), creatine kinase (CK), D-dimer and lower absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) (WMD_ALC = − 0.35 × 10⁹/L [CI − 0.43, − 0.27], p < 0.001, I² = 94.2%; < 0.8 × 10⁹/L, OR_ALC = 3.74 [CI 1.77, 7.92], p = 0.001, I² = 65.5%) were all associated with higher mortality rate. On admission WBC, ALC, D-dimer, CRP, LDH, and CK changes could serve as alarming prognostic factors. The correct interpretation of laboratory abnormalities can guide therapeutic decisions, especially in early identification of potentially critical cases. This meta-analysis should help to allocate resources and save lives by enabling timely intervention.

Pancreatic necrosis is a consistent prognostic factor in acute pancreatitis (AP). However, the clinical scores currently in use are either too complicated or require data that are unavailable on admission or lack sufficient predictive value. We therefore aimed to develop a tool to aid in necrosis prediction. The XGBoost machine learning algorithm processed data from 2387 patients with AP. The confidence of the model was estimated by a bootstrapping method and interpreted via the 10th and the 90th percentiles of the prediction scores. Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values were calculated to quantify the contribution of each variable provided. Finally, the model was implemented as an online application using the Streamlit Python-based framework. The XGBoost classifier provided an AUC value of 0.757. Glucose, C-reactive protein, alkaline phosphatase, gender and total white blood cell count have the most impact on prediction based on the SHAP values. The relationship between the size of the training dataset and model performance shows that prediction performance can be improved. This study combines necrosis prediction and artificial intelligence. The predictive potential of this model is comparable to the current clinical scoring systems and has several advantages over them.

The body composition of patients with celiac disease (CD), on which the effects of a gluten-free diet (GFD) are controversial, differs from that of the average population. In this study, we aimed to compare the body composition across CD patients before a GFD, CD patients after a one-year GFD and non-celiac control subjects. A systematic search was conducted using five electronic databases up to 15 July 2021 for studies that reported at least one of the pre-specified outcomes. In meta-analyses, weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. A total of 25 studies were eligible for systematic review, seven of which were included in meta-analysis. During a ≥1-year GFD, fat mass of CD patients, compared to that at baseline, significantly increased (WMD = 4.1 kg, 95% CI = 1.5 to 6.6, three studies). In CD patients after a ≥1-year GFD, compared to non-celiac controls, fat mass (WMD = −5.8 kg, 95% CI = −8.7 to −2.9, three studies) and fat-free mass (WMD = −1.9 kg, 95% CI = −3.0 to −0.7, three studies) were significantly lower. In conclusion, body composition-related parameters of CD patients differ from that of the non-celiac control subjects even after a longstanding GFD.

Background and study aims: Endoscopic biliary stent placement is a minimally invasive intervention for patients with biliary strictures. Stent patency and function time are crucial factors. Suprapapillary versus transpapillary stent positioning may contribute to stent function time, so a meta-analysis was performed in this comparison. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the CENTRAL, Embase, and MEDLINE databases to find data on suprapapillary stent placement compared to the transpapillary method via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in cases of biliary stenosis of any etiology and any stent type until December 2020. We carried out a meta-analysis focusing on the following outcomes: stent patency, stent migration, rate of cholangitis and pancreatitis, and other reported complications. Results: Three prospective and ten retrospective studies involving 1028 patients were included. Suprapapillary stent placement appeared to be superior to transpapillary stent positioning in patency (weighted mean difference = 50.23 days, 95% CI: 8.56, 91.98; p = 0.0.018). In a subgroup analysis of malignant indications, suprapapillary positioning showed a lower rate of cholangitis (OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.93; p = 0.036). Another subgroup analysis investigating metal stents in a suprapapillary position resulted in a lower rate of pancreatitis (OR: 0.16, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.95; p = 0.043) compared to transpapillary stent placement. There was no difference in stent migration rates between the two groups (OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.17, 2.72; p = 0.577). Conclusions: Based on our results, suprapapillary biliary stenting has longer stent patency. Moreover, the stent migration rate did not differ between the suprapapillary and transpapillary groups.