Американское общество гирудотерапии

Utility of Routine Laboratory Biomarkers to Detect COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Meta-analysis published in Viruses (2021)

Последнее обновление: June 18, 2026Рецензент: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Meta-analysisКлинические исследованияSuklan J et al. · Viruses, 2021

Abstract

No routine laboratory biomarkers perform well enough in diagnosing COVID-19 in isolation for them to be used as a standalone diagnostic test or to help clinicians prioritize patients for treatment. Instead, other diagnostic tests are needed. The aim of this work was to statistically summarise routine laboratory biomarker measurements in COVID-19-positive and -negative patients to inform future work. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were performed. The search included names of commonly used, routine laboratory tests in the UK NHS, and focused on research papers reporting laboratory results of patients diagnosed with COVID-19. A random effects meta-analysis of the standardized mean difference between COVID-19-positive and -negative groups was conducted for each biomarker. When comparing reported laboratory biomarker results, we identified decreased white blood cell, neutrophil, lymphocyte, eosinophil, and platelet counts; while lactate dehydrogenase, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine aminotransferase were elevated in COVID-19-positive compared to COVID-19-negative patients. Differences were identified across a number of routine laboratory biomarkers between COVID-19-positive and -negative patients. Further research is required to identify whether routine laboratory biomarkers can be used in the development of a clinical scoring system to aid with triage of patients.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeJournal ArticleMeta-AnalysisResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tSystematic Review
Indexed MeSH termsBiomarkersCOVID-19Diagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansUnited Kingdom

Резюме

No routine laboratory biomarkers perform well enough in diagnosing COVID-19 in isolation for them to be used as a standalone diagnostic test or to help clinicians prioritize patients for treatment.

Почему это важно для гирудотерапии

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated routine laboratory biomarkers for distinguishing COVID-19-positive from COVID-19-negative patients, analyzing standardized mean differences across multiple common blood tests used in the UK NHS. The study found that COVID-19-positive patients had decreased white blood cell, neutrophil, lymphocyte, eosinophil, and platelet counts alongside elevated lactate dehydrogenase, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine aminotransferase compared to negative patients. This study has no relevance to hirudotherapy, the leech secretome, or leech-derived therapeutics. It concerns diagnostic biomarker performance in infectious disease and does not address any leech-related intervention, anticoagulant mechanism, or wound-healing application.

Цитирование

Utility of Routine Laboratory Biomarkers to Detect COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Suklan J et al. · Viruses, 2021

Связанный клинический контекст

Узнайте, как это исследование связано с клинической практикой

Добавлено в библиотеку ASH: May 27, 2026 · Последнее обновление сайта: June 18, 2026

Этот сайт предоставляет образовательную информацию и не является медицинской консультацией, диагнозом или рекомендацией по лечению. Гирудотерапия сопряжена с клинически значимыми рисками и должна проводиться только квалифицированными клиницистами в рамках институционально утверждённых протоколов. Разрешение FDA 510(k) для медицинских пиявок ограничено определёнными показаниями; обсуждения исследовательского и нелицензионного применения отмечены соответствующим образом. Для индивидуальных медицинских рекомендаций обратитесь к квалифицированному медицинскому специалисту.