EXPRESS: Protective Effects of Booster Dose of SARS-COV-2 Vaccination Against Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome: A Systematic Review.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Ved Patel, Maximilian Korsun, Joseph Steven Cervia
{"title":"EXPRESS: Protective Effects of Booster Dose of SARS-COV-2 Vaccination Against Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Ved Patel, Maximilian Korsun, Joseph Steven Cervia","doi":"10.1177/10815589251346963","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The global impact of COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has extended beyond acute infection, with Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome (PACS) affecting an estimated 10% of recovered individuals. PACS manifests a range of debilitating symptoms, including fatigue, cognitive impairment, and gastrointestinal issues. While vaccination has proven effective in mitigating severe COVID-19 outcomes, the role of booster doses in preventing PACS remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate whether COVID-19 booster vaccinations reduce the incidence and severity of PACS in individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in adherence to PRISMA guidelines. Databases PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched for peer-reviewed studies published in English from January 2020-August 2023. Inclusion criteria encompassed RCTs, prospective cohort studies, and case-control studies comparing PACS prevalence between booster recipients and non-recipients. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tool. Data synthesis included pooled prevalence estimates and narrative analyses. Of 849 identified studies, 22 met inclusion criteria, with 12 providing complete data for meta-analysis. Among 38,718 participants, a trend toward lower PACS prevalence was observed in booster recipients (RR: 0.66; 95%-CI: 0.41 - 1.09), though heterogeneity (I² = 98%) limited statistical significance. Risk of bias analysis classified most studies as low or moderate risk, with two high-risk studies reporting higher PACS rates in boosted individuals. This study suggests a potential protective effect of booster vaccinations against PACS, though findings were not statistically significant. Further research with larger, standardized cohorts is essential to validate these observations and guide vaccination strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":16112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Investigative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"10815589251346963"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Investigative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10815589251346963","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The global impact of COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has extended beyond acute infection, with Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome (PACS) affecting an estimated 10% of recovered individuals. PACS manifests a range of debilitating symptoms, including fatigue, cognitive impairment, and gastrointestinal issues. While vaccination has proven effective in mitigating severe COVID-19 outcomes, the role of booster doses in preventing PACS remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate whether COVID-19 booster vaccinations reduce the incidence and severity of PACS in individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in adherence to PRISMA guidelines. Databases PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched for peer-reviewed studies published in English from January 2020-August 2023. Inclusion criteria encompassed RCTs, prospective cohort studies, and case-control studies comparing PACS prevalence between booster recipients and non-recipients. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tool. Data synthesis included pooled prevalence estimates and narrative analyses. Of 849 identified studies, 22 met inclusion criteria, with 12 providing complete data for meta-analysis. Among 38,718 participants, a trend toward lower PACS prevalence was observed in booster recipients (RR: 0.66; 95%-CI: 0.41 - 1.09), though heterogeneity (I² = 98%) limited statistical significance. Risk of bias analysis classified most studies as low or moderate risk, with two high-risk studies reporting higher PACS rates in boosted individuals. This study suggests a potential protective effect of booster vaccinations against PACS, though findings were not statistically significant. Further research with larger, standardized cohorts is essential to validate these observations and guide vaccination strategies.

EXPRESS: SARS-COV-2疫苗加强剂对急性后COVID-19综合征的保护作用:系统评价
由SARS-CoV-2引起的COVID-19的全球影响已超出急性感染范围,估计10%的康复者受到急性后COVID-19综合征(PACS)的影响。PACS表现出一系列衰弱症状,包括疲劳、认知障碍和胃肠道问题。虽然疫苗接种已被证明可有效减轻COVID-19的严重后果,但加强剂量在预防PACS中的作用仍不清楚。本研究旨在评估COVID-19加强疫苗接种是否可以降低先前感染SARS-CoV-2的个体的PACS发病率和严重程度。遵循PRISMA指南进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。检索了PubMed、Embase和Cochrane数据库,检索了2020年1月至2023年8月期间发表的英文同行评议研究。纳入标准包括随机对照试验、前瞻性队列研究和病例对照研究,比较PACS加强接受者和非接受者之间的患病率。使用乔安娜布里格斯研究所的评估工具评估偏倚风险。数据综合包括汇总患病率估计和叙述分析。在849项确定的研究中,22项符合纳入标准,其中12项提供了用于荟萃分析的完整数据。在38,718名参与者中,观察到增强受体PACS患病率降低的趋势(RR: 0.66;95%-CI: 0.41 - 1.09),尽管异质性(I²= 98%)限制了统计学意义。偏倚风险分析将大多数研究归类为低风险或中等风险,其中两项高风险研究报告了增强个体的PACS发生率较高。这项研究表明,加强疫苗接种对PACS有潜在的保护作用,尽管研究结果没有统计学意义。对更大的标准化队列进行进一步研究对于验证这些观察结果和指导疫苗接种策略至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Investigative Medicine
Journal of Investigative Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
111
审稿时长
24 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Investigative Medicine (JIM) is the official publication of the American Federation for Medical Research. The journal is peer-reviewed and publishes high-quality original articles and reviews in the areas of basic, clinical, and translational medical research. JIM publishes on all topics and specialty areas that are critical to the conduct of the entire spectrum of biomedical research: from the translation of clinical observations at the bedside, to basic and animal research to clinical research and the implementation of innovative medical care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信