Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T23:35:58.003Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cardiac manifestations of multisystem inflammatory syndrome of children after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2023

Carlos A. Carmona Open the ORCID record for Carlos A. Carmona [Opens in a new window] ,
Mohamed Kuziez ,
Caio F. Freitas ,
John W. Cyrus ,
Jesse Bain  and
Oliver Karam Open the ORCID record for Oliver Karam [Opens in a new window]
Carlos A. Carmona*
Affiliation:
Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Children’s Hospital of Richmond at VCU, Richmond, VA, USA
Mohamed Kuziez
Affiliation:
Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Richmond at VCU, Richmond, VA, USA
Caio F. Freitas
Affiliation:
Division of Pediatrics, Advent Health for Children, Pediatrics Residency, Orlando, FL, USA
John W. Cyrus
Affiliation:
Tompkins-McCaw Library for the Health Sciences, VCU Libraries, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
Jesse Bain
Affiliation:
Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Children’s Hospital of Richmond at VCU, Richmond, VA, USA
Oliver Karam
Affiliation:
Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Children’s Hospital of Richmond at VCU, Richmond, VA, USA Section of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
*
Author for correspondence: C. A. Carmona Jr, DO, Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Children’s Hospital of Richmond at VCU, Richmond, VA 23298, USA. Tel.: 804-828-0625; Fax: 804-828-0645. E-mail: Carlos.carmona@vcuhealth.org
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the prevalence of cardiac manifestations associated with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children worldwide. We conducted electronic searches in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and the World Health Organization COVID-19 Literature Database from the inception of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic to 1 January, 2022. Three authors independently screened the abstracts to determine eligibility, assessed methodology in the full texts, and extracted the data.

We identified 2848 citations; 94 studies (14,932 patients) were included. The prevalence of vasopressors was 48.2% (95% CI 45.1%, 51.3%), left ventricular systolic dysfunction occurred in 37.2% (95% CI 34.1%, 40.3%), myocarditis in 34.1% (95% CI 30.5%, 37.8%), electrocardiographic dysrhythmias and abnormalities detected in 23.1% (95% CI 18.8%, 27.6%), coronary abnormalities identified in 18% (95% CI 16%, 20%), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation deployed in 2.2% (95% CI 1.7%, 2.8%), and mortality rate of 2.2% (95% CI 1.7%, 2.7%). A sensitivity analysis was performed after removing eleven studies with high bias, and the adjusted prevalence was not different than the original evaluation.

In this meta-analysis of the largest cohort of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children patients to date, we established the most accurate prevalence of the most common cardiac manifestations. Providers will subsequently have more precise data to anticipate patient outcomes and approach discussions concerning the frequency of monitoring outside the acute hospital period.

Keywords

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in childrenmyocarditiscardiac manifestations
Type
Original Article
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 33 , Issue 11 , November 2023 , pp. 2319 - 2327
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

In December 2019, a distinct clinical presentation of pneumonia was first described in China as being caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). By January 2020, the virus spread Reference Clark, Sanchez-de-Toledo and Bautista-Rodriguez1–Reference Kobayashi, Dionne and Ferraro5 with adults developing systemic hyperinflammation and myocardial injury. Reference de Diniz, Cardoso and Sawamura6 children made up 2–6% of cases initially but were mostly asymptomatic. Some had mild respiratory symptoms, and the few with comorbidities required hospitalisation or intensive care. Reference Capone, Subramony and Sweberg7

In April 2020, the first reports of paediatric systemic inflammatory syndrome related to severe SARS-CoV-2 emerged from the United Kingdom at the peak of the pandemic in Europe. Reference Capone, Subramony and Sweberg7–Reference Feldstein, Rose and Horwitz13 The syndrome consisted of hypotension, multiorgan involvement, and systemic inflammation. The following month, reports from the rest of Europe and North America validated the severity of this unfolding hyperinflammatory condition by comparing it to Kawasaki disease, toxic shock syndrome, and macrophage activation syndrome. Reference Kavurt, Bağrul and Gül2,Reference Kıymet, Böncüoğlu and Şahinkaya3,Reference Kobayashi, Dionne and Ferraro5,Reference Jhaveri, Ahluwalia and Kaushik14–Reference Minocha, Phoon, Verma and Singh17 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a case definition for disease surveillance and called the condition multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. Reference Feldstein, Tenforde and Friedman18 The definition is based on age <21 years old, the presence of fever ≥38.0°C for ≥24 hours, increased inflammatory markers (such as ferritin, C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, procalcitonin), the involvement of two or more organ systems, COVID-19 infection or exposure within prior 4 weeks, and exclusion of other diagnoses. Reference Racko, Smane, Klavina, Pucuka, Roge and Pavare19,Reference Shabab, Dubisky, Singh, Crippen, Abulaban and Aldrich20

Initial reports confirm the development of myocarditis and/or left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Reference Sözeri, Çağlayan and Atasayan21 This includes coronary artery dilation and aneurysms, Reference Ramcharan, Nolan and Lai22,Reference Alsaied, Tremoulet and Burns23 cardiac conduction abnormalities, and up to a 12% rate of dysrhythmias. Reference Alsaied, Tremoulet and Burns23,Reference Regan, O’Byrne and Stewart24 In severe cases of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, patients were presenting in shock requiring fluid resuscitation, inotropic support, mechanical ventilation, and, in most severe cases, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Reference Alsaied, Tremoulet and Burns23 There have been numerous heterogenous small case series reporting cardiac complications in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children with the largest samples coming from Belay et al Reference Belay, Abrams and Oster25 (n = 1563), Bowen et al Reference Bowen, Miller and Zambrano26 (n = 2818), and Miller et al Reference Miller, Zambrano and Yousaf27 (n = 4470). However, there has never been an attempt to combine these studies to establish the prevalence of these cardiac symptoms.

By determining the accurate prevalence, providers will better anticipate the outcome of their patients and approach discussions about the appropriate frequency of monitoring outside the acute period. Our objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children patients, focusing specifically on the associated cardiac sequelae and mortality.

Methods

Design

This is a systematic review and meta-analysis consisting of studies to determine the prevalence of different cardiac complications secondary to multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. In summary, we included prospective and retrospective cohorts at single-centre and multi-centre facilities both in the United States and internationally. We conducted electronic searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and World Health Organization COVID-19 Literature Database from the inception of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic to 1 January, 2022. Two authors independently screened the abstracts and full texts, extracted the data, and resolved disagreements by discussion with a third reviewer.

Types of studies

We included studies enrolling children and adolescents from ages 0 to 21 years of age with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children-associated SARS-CoV-2 infection that discussed the most frequently associated cardiac manifestations. The search included information both from single and multi-centre institutions. It encompassed a diversified blend of retrospective and prospective data that were observational and contained cross-sectional, cohort, and case studies with greater than ten patients. Articles in languages other than English were considered eligible and translated via Google Translation.

We limited our review to studies assessing myocardial function via echocardiogram to define left ventricular systolic dysfunction as an ejection fraction ≤60%. Studies that discussed other echocardiographic measurements such as fractional shortening and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion by M-mode, early and late mitral inflow peak velocities by spectral Doppler, and early diastolic septal and lateral mitral annular peak velocities were included but not the primary parameter evaluated. Simpson’s biplane method was the most consistently reported measurement among previous reviews and implemented for this work. We used studies that classified coronary artery abnormalities as described by the Boston Children’s Hospital z-score system. Normal was <2, dilation ≥2 to <2.5, and aneurysm ≥2.5. We also chose to report electrocardiographic dysrhythmias and abnormalities as a combined outcome since many articles did not report specific findings. Studies that defined myocarditis according to clinical presentation (shock, hypotension, chest pain, palpitations, or hypoxia) and diagnostic criteria were selected. Papers describing diagnostic criteria dependent upon electrocardiographic abnormalities (ST/T wave changes, ventricular dysrhythmias, and intraventricular conduction delay), elevated troponin or brain natriuretic peptide, functional/structural abnormalities on echocardiogram or cardiac magnetic resonance, and tissue characterisation by cardiac magnetic resonance per the Lake Louise criteria were incorporated.

We excluded clinical guidelines, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, editorials, and commentaries. Studies looking at multisystem inflammatory syndrome related to the adult population were also excluded, as well as articles discussing solely disease pathogenesis, molecular biology, immunology, other serotypes of coronavirus, or viral agents. Reports of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children along with discussions of an emergency room course focus on radiological findings (x-rays, CT, or ultrasound), medication trials, case reports with <10 patients, or letters to the editor that were solely perspective or commentary pieces not describing specific cases of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children were also excluded.

Types of participants

We included studies that enrolled children and adolescents (aged 0–21 years), diagnosed with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, and which reported myocardial dysfunction, conduction abnormalities, shock, and/or coronary disease. The summary table (Supplementary Table S1) gives an overview of the country of origin of the study, single or multi-centre, number of patients, number needing ICU, predominant comorbidity, and number of deceased patients.

Types of outcome measures

Our primary outcome was determining the prevalence of subjects requiring vasopressor support, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, electrocardiographic changes including dysrhythmias, coronary abnormalities (dilations and/or aneurysms), ECMO, and mortality. Our secondary outcome was identifying the prevalence of myocarditis by stratifying via method of diagnosis (Supplementary Table S3). Some studies incorporated cardiac MRI and identified myocarditis by assessing myocardial inflammation using the Lake Louise Criteria. In instances where MRI was not available, the remaining authors diagnosed myocarditis per criteria described within their manuscript (Denoted as Predetermined Criteria and Definition of Myocarditis According to Study in Supplementary Table S3). For the studies that did not characterise this measure, we defined myocarditis as left ventricular systolic dysfunction [ejection fraction < 55%], troponin, and/or brain natriuretic protein above the threshold of normal per the study, and any symptomatology [hypotension, shock, inotrope requirement, or oxygen requirements] (Denoted as Strict Criteria in Supplementary Table S3). The specific threshold per study for the definition of left ventricular systolic dysfunction and normal values used for troponin/brain natriuretic peptide/pro-brain natriuretic peptide are listed in Supplementary Table S3. Among all studies, dilation of a coronary artery was defined as a Z-score ≥2 to <2.5 and an aneurysm of coronary vessel as ≥2.5 per the Boston Children’s Hospital z-score system. Reference Sirico, Basso and Reffo28

Search methods for identification of studies

For this systematic review, we performed a search in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), and the WHO Global Research on Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Literature Database (https://search.bvsalud.org/global-literature-on-novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov/) from the inception of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic to 1 January, 2022 (Supplemental Online Data). The search included keywords and controlled vocabulary for coronavirus/COVID-19 and for the heart and select cardiac complications (Supplemental File 1). We imported the results to Covidence (version 1238, Melbourne, Australia), which detected duplicates.

Selection of studies

Two out of three reviewers (CC, MK, CFF) independently examined each potential study (as randomly assigned by Covidence) and decided on their inclusion in the review (Fig 1), based on its methods and outcomes. We performed this process without blinding of study authors, institutions, journals of publication, or results. We resolved disagreements by reaching consensus among review authors.

Figure 1. PRISMA study flow diagram, showing the total number of references that were screened, the reasons to exclude the references that made it to full-text screening, and the number of references that were included.

Data extraction and management

For each study included in the systematic review, two authors (CC & MK) independently extracted data. We resolved disagreements by discussion and another author (OK) providing the tie-breaking vote. We contacted all authors for their assistance in obtaining missing data pertinent to our analysis of primary outcomes. We also sought the authors’ support with calculating the number of myocarditis cases in their study based on our strict clinical criteria.

Assessment of risk of bias in included studies

We evaluated the validity and design characteristics of each study looking for major potential biases such as study participation, study attrition, prognostic factor measurement, outcome measurement, study confounders, and statistical analysis. Reference Hayden, van der Windt, Cartwright, Côté and Bombardier29 Two authors reviewed and ranked each study’s quality factor separately and defined studies as having low risk of bias only if they adequately fulfilled all the criteria.

Assessment of prevalence

We reported the prevalence and its 95% confidence interval as the number of patients with the outcomes of interest (vasopressor support, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, myocarditis, electrocardiographic dysrhythmias, coronary abnormalities including dilations and/or aneurysms, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and mortality over the total number of enrolled patients). To account for small proportions and interval confidences close to 0, we pooled the individual proportions using arcsine transformation. Reference Barendregt, Doi, Lee, Norman and Vos30

Assuming each study estimated a study-specific true effect, we used random-effect models to pool odds ratios. Such models assume no a priori knowledge about the association between the real, or apparent, prevalence; the differences between the studies are considered to be random. These models account for heterogeneity, with the centre of this distribution describing the average of the effects, and its width describing the degree of heterogeneity. We used the DerSimonian-Laird random-effect method in the presence of significant heterogeneity. Reference DerSimonian and Kacker31

Assessment of heterogeneity

We explored heterogeneity using the I2 statistic. An I2 statistic higher than 50% represented substantial heterogeneity. 32

Sensitivity analysis

To further explore the effect of risk of bias, we conducted a sensitivity analysis, removing studies with a high risk of bias.

Statistical Analyses

Meta-analysis was undertaken using a random-effects model, conducted using the Open-Meta [Analyst] program (School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA). Forest plots of prevalence were calculated with 95% CI.

Results

Studies

We identified a total of 2858 references, of which 657 were duplicates and therefore removed from review, leaving a total of 2201 studies that were screened. A total of 1984 studies were not relevant to this review, leaving 217 full-text articles. From these, 94 met eligibility criteria (Fig 1). Of the articles, 71 (75.5%) were solely retrospective studies Reference Clark, Sanchez-de-Toledo and Bautista-Rodriguez1,Reference Kıymet, Böncüoğlu and Şahinkaya3,Reference Kobayashi, Dionne and Ferraro5–Reference Abdel-Haq, Asmar and Deza Leon12,Reference Gün, Kendirli and Botan15,Reference Minocha, Phoon, Verma and Singh17,Reference Racko, Smane, Klavina, Pucuka, Roge and Pavare19,Reference Shabab, Dubisky, Singh, Crippen, Abulaban and Aldrich20,Reference Ramcharan, Nolan and Lai22,Reference Regan, O’Byrne and Stewart24–Reference Sirico, Basso and Reffo28,Reference Belhadjer, Méot and Bajolle33–Reference Whittaker, Bamford and Kenny81 , 7 (7.4%) studies had a mix Reference Feldstein, Rose and Horwitz13,Reference Feldstein, Tenforde and Friedman18,Reference Acevedo, Piñeres-Olave and Niño-Serna82–Reference Torres, Izquierdo and Acuña86 of retrospective and prospective components, and 17 (17%) were prospective Reference Kavurt, Bağrul and Gül2,Reference García-Salido and de Carlos Vicente4,Reference Lima-Setta, Magalhães-Barbosa and Rodrigues-Santos16,Reference Sözeri, Çağlayan and Atasayan21,Reference Ben-Shimol, Livni and Megged87–Reference Yagnam, Izquierdo, Villena, Gonzalez and Drago98 studies. Fifty-six studies were from a single centre, and thirty-eight were from multiple centres. A summary of the included studies is presented in Supplementary Table 1.

Prevalence of overall results

Among the 86 studies that report vasopressor use, the prevalence is 48.2% (95% CI 45.1%; 51.3%), n = 14,593, I2 = 89.70%, Supplemental Figure S1(A). Of the 88 studies that report, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, the prevalence is 37.2% (95% CI 34.1%; 40.3%), n = 14,594, I2 = 90.2%, Supplemental Figure S2(A). Among the 80 studies that report myocarditis, the prevalence is 34.1% (95% CI 30.5%; 37.8%), n = 13,293, I2 = 92.6%, Supplemental Figure S3(A). Of the 59 studies that report electrocardiographic abnormalities, the prevalence is 23.1% (95% CI 18.8%; 27.6%), n = 11,470, I2 = 95.5%, Supplemental Figure S4 (A). Among the 90 studies that report coronary abnormalities, the prevalence is 18% (95% CI 16%; 20%), n = 14,707, I2 = 83.4%, Supplemental Figure S5(A). For the 77 studies that report extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use, the prevalence is 2.2% (95% CI 1.7%, 2.8%), n = 12,778, I2 = 53.8%, Supplemental Figure S6(A). Among the 90 studies that report mortality, the prevalence is 2.2% (95% CI 1.7%; 2.8%), n = 14,620, I2 = 43.8%, Supplementary Figure S7(A).

Assessment of the risks of bias

The overall risk of bias was estimated to be low. We assessed that the risk of bias was low in 60 studies (63.8%), moderate in 23 studies (24.4%), and high in 11 studies (11.76%). The full assessment is shown in Supplementary Table S2.

Sensitivity analysis based on the quality of evidence

For this sensitivity analysis, we removed the studies with a high risk of bias and included those with low and moderate risk of bias. Of the 77 studies that report vasopressor use, the prevalence is 49.1% (95% CI 45.8%; 52.3%), n = 14,280, I2 = 90.3%, Supplemental Figure S1(B). Among the 79 studies remaining that report left ventricular systolic dysfunction, the prevalence is 37.3% (95% CI 34.1%; 40.6%) n = 14,318, I2 = 90.8%, Supplemental Figure S2(B). Of the 74 studies that report myocarditis, the prevalence is 34.1% (95% CI 30.5%; 37.9%), n = 13,109, I2 = 93%, Supplemental Figure S3(B). Among the 56 studies that report electrocardiographic abnormalities, the prevalence is 21.4% (95% CI 17.3%; 25.8%), n = 11,363, I2 = 95.3%, Supplemental Figure S4(B). Of the 81 studies that report coronary abnormalities, the prevalence is 18.2% (95% CI 16.2%; 20.4%), n = 14,422, I2 = 84.7%, Supplemental Figure S5(B). Among the 70 studies that report extracorporeal membrane oxygenation utility, the prevalence is 2.3% (95% CI 1.7%; 2.9%), n = 12,514, I2 = 57.7%, Supplemental Figure S6(B). Among the 78 studies that report mortality, the prevalence is 2.0% (95% CI 1.6%; 2.5%), n = 14,262, I2 = 38.3%, Supplementary Figure S7(B).

Assessment of myocarditis

Among the 94 studies available, only 80 could be used to extract information regarding the prevalence of myocarditis. Either some authors did not respond to our requests to provide their number of myocarditis cases or there was incomplete data to determine the prevalence. For 45 studies (Denoted as Strict Criteria in Supplementary Table 3), we categorised a posteriori the clinical criteria to determine the number of myocarditis. Twenty-four studies (Denoted as Predetermined Criteria in Supplementary Table 3) already ascertained cases of myocarditis in their respective populations based on criteria that included left ventricular systolic dysfunction on echocardiogram plus elevated troponin and/or brain natriuretic peptide. Four studies Reference Ramcharan, Nolan and Lai22,Reference Grimaud, Starck and Levy38,Reference Haslak, Barut and Durak57,Reference Toubiana, Poirault and Corsia97 within this subcategory further validated the diagnosis of myocarditis by requiring electrocardiographic changes such as ST-segment elevation/depression. Eight studies (Denoted as CMR in Supplementary Table 3) diagnosed myocarditis via cardiac resonance imaging using the Lake Louise criteria. Three studies Reference Erol and Sari10,Reference Vukomanovic, Krasic and Prijic80,Reference DeBiasi, Harahsheh and Srinivasalu92 had zero cases of myocarditis. The specific definitions of left ventricular systolic dysfunction and parameters for normal troponin, brain natriuretic peptide, and pro-brain natriuretic peptide are mentioned in Supplementary Table S3.

Discussion

To address the heterogeneity of various small case series and cohorts, this systematic review aimed to evaluate the prevalence of common cardiac manifestations in afflicted critically ill children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis looking at the prevalence from such a robust sample (n = 14,932). Overall, the quality of evidence was good with 64% of studies having a low risk of bias and 24% a moderate risk of bias.

Severe multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children presents with shock requiring vasopressors to sustain haemodynamics. Early systematic reviews report a prevalence range from 40 to 52% Reference Ahmed, Advani and Moreira99,Reference Kaushik, Gupta, Sood, Sharma and Verma100 while single international studies show 70 to 80% utilisation. Reference de Caro-Patón, de Azagra-Garde, García-Salido, Cabrero-Hernández, Tamariz and Nieto-Moro11,Reference Belhadjer, Méot and Bajolle33,Reference Acevedo, Piñeres-Olave and Niño-Serna82 This may be plausible as some middle and lower-income countries have higher comorbid patients, reduced disease recognition, and slower access to healthcare. In our analysis, vasopressors continue to be critical in shock management as the prevalence was 48.2% (95% CI 45.1%, 51.3%). In shock, cardiac dysfunction is frequently evaluated with an echocardiogram to assess left ventricular ejection fraction. Caution is necessary when interpreting this parameter because it is a volume-based measure that is preload dependent and subject to vasoactive use. Reference Basu, Kim and Sharron48,Reference Hejazi, Loke and Harahsheh101 Myocardial tissue motion and deformation estimates with strain echocardiography are independent of these loading conditions, and indexes such as global longitudinal strain and early diastolic strain rate may be an option to grade ventricular dysfunction more accurately. This detects impaired function even when cardiac magnetic resonance proved myocarditis reveals a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Reference Kavurt, Bağrul and Gül2,Reference Kobayashi, Dionne and Ferraro5,Reference Basu, Kim and Sharron48,Reference Matsubara, Kauffman and Wang64,Reference Sanil, Misra and Safa72 However, in keeping with consistency of measurements more commonly reported, we evaluated cardiac dysfunction via left ventricular systolic dysfunction. We reported a prevalence of 37.2% (95% CI 34.1%, 40.3%) compared to a previously described range of 32–58%. Reference Alsaied, Tremoulet and Burns23,Reference Ahmed, Advani and Moreira99,Reference Kaushik, Gupta, Sood, Sharma and Verma100 This left ventricular systolic dysfunction requires outpatient follow-up with echocardiograms because it can persist even after 1 month from hospitalisation Reference Basar and Sonmez46,Reference Capone, Misra and Ganigara84,Reference Farooqi, Chan and Weller91 with some residual left ventricular functional dysfunction Reference Belhadjer, Méot and Bajolle33,Reference Basar and Sonmez46,Reference Sanil, Misra and Safa72,Reference Theocharis, Wong and Pushparajah76,Reference Capone, Misra and Ganigara84,Reference Bagri, Deepak and Meena88,Reference Farooqi, Chan and Weller91,Reference Tiwari, Balan and Rauf96 persisting 2–6 weeks after discharge.

Other non-invasive imaging such as cardiac magnetic resonance is useful for functional assessment and structural changes like in myocarditis. Reference Aeschlimann, Misra and Hussein83,Reference Caforio, Pankuweit and Arbustini102 Despite its sensitivity in detecting inflammation, its availability is limited Reference Minocha, Phoon, Verma and Singh17,Reference Sirico, Basso and Reffo28,Reference Bermejo, Bautista-Rodriguez and Fraisse50,Reference Felsenstein, Willis and Lythgoe56,Reference Theocharis, Wong and Pushparajah76,Reference Valverde, Singh and Sanchez-de-Toledo79,Reference Aeschlimann, Misra and Hussein83,Reference Capone, Misra and Ganigara84 as evidenced by the few studies we identified. Twenty-four incorporated the criteria Reference Caforio, Pankuweit and Arbustini102 where ≥1 clinical presentation and ≥1 diagnostic criteria were sufficient for clinical diagnosis (Predetermined Criteria in Supplemental Table 3). To improve the accuracy in our analysis, we elected to make criteria stricter by needing ≥2 diagnostic criteria: cardiac biomarkers (abnormal troponin and/or pro-brain natriuretic peptide) + left ventricular systolic dysfunction (ejection fraction <55%) in addition to the clinical presentation Reference Caforio, Pankuweit and Arbustini102 (Strict Criteria in Supplemental Table 3). Our analysis therefore elicited a prevalence of 34.1% (95% CI 30.5%, 37.8%). Our results lie at the higher end of previous estimates, which reported a prevalence from 23 to 33%. Reference Kaushik, Gupta, Sood, Sharma and Verma100,Reference Hejazi, Loke and Harahsheh101 Even though children overall improve shortly after the diagnosis of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children is made, long-term complications such as fibrosis, dilated cardiomyopathy, and arrhythmias may present thus warranting close monitoring. Reference Erol and Sari10 Ventricular dysrhythmias in dilated cardiomyopathy are lethal complications of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children-induced myocarditis in the latter stages but dysrhythmias overall can present early on with 7–60% of patients Reference Alsaied, Tremoulet and Burns23 having irritable foci. Despite the heterogeneity of studies, we were unable to perform further analyses looking at the prevalence of certain rhythms as the reporting of electrocardiographic information was inconsistent and infrequent. Those studies that were, are listed in Supplementary Table S3. From the studies that did cite this data, the calculated prevalence of electrocardiographic abnormalities was 23.1% (95% CI 18.8%, 27.6%). Despite the severity and potential for worsening progression, these dysrhythmias (including first-degree atrio-ventricular block) typically resolve within the first 2 weeks Reference Clark, Sanchez-de-Toledo and Bautista-Rodriguez1,Reference Ramcharan, Nolan and Lai22,Reference Hejazi, Loke and Harahsheh101 before the 2-week follow-up. Reference Dionne, Mah and Son9 The present literature describes only one report of three patients with persistent asymptomatic bradycardia lasting through the 2-month follow-up. Reference Erol and Sari10

Coronary abnormalities which can take months to resolve are the opposite of the swifter trajectory for healing seen in dysrhythmias. Resolution typically occurs in 79% of cases by 1 month Reference Felsenstein, Willis and Lythgoe56 and in 100% of cases by 3 months. Reference Rakha, Sobh and Hager71,Reference Patnaik, Jain and Ahmed103 In our patient cohort, the prevalence of coronary abnormalities was 18.0% (95% CI 16.0%; 20.0%) in comparison to the described 6–24%. Reference Suresh Kumar, Awasthi and Thakur8,Reference Sözeri, Çağlayan and Atasayan21,Reference Alsaied, Tremoulet and Burns23,Reference Ahmed, Advani and Moreira99–Reference Hejazi, Loke and Harahsheh101 Some had residual aneurysms Reference Cheung, Zachariah and Gorelik53 and dilation after 2 weeks, Reference Capone, Misra and Ganigara84 4–6 weeks Reference Rakha, Sobh and Hager71,Reference Bagri, Deepak and Meena88,Reference Tiwari, Balan and Rauf96 , 8 weeks Reference Capone, Misra and Ganigara84,Reference Fabi, Filice and Biagi90 , and by 3 months Reference Tiwari, Balan and Rauf96 post-discharge. We were unable to complete an analysis of the total cases of coronary dilations versus coronary aneurysms since some studies did not define them aside from the term “coronary abnormalities” or simply did not report them as findings. Of those in Supplementary Table S3, we tallied 717 total cases of coronary abnormalities with 300 coronary dilations (41.8%) and 367 coronary aneurysms (51.2%). Other variations of abnormalities included those describing arteries as hyperechoic, prominent, or lacking tapering. Regardless of the presentation, the evolution of the abnormality is imperative to monitor over the ensuing months as one patient had a stable medium coronary aneurysm (Z-score 9.8) 6 months out from discharge; these can become giant raising the risk of a myocardial infarction. Reference Bautista-Rodriguez, Sanchez-de-Toledo and Clark47,Reference Hejazi, Loke and Harahsheh101

Even though most patients recover rather uneventfully once medical therapies are initiated, some are affected with ventricular dysrhythmias, refractory shock, and/or acute heart failure. Reference Capone, Subramony and Sweberg7,Reference Alsaied, Tremoulet and Burns23 These severe cases go can extend beyond vasopressor and mechanical ventilation management to necessitate extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. Early in the pandemic, Belhadjer et al Reference Belhadjer, Méot and Bajolle33 published that 28% of patients at their centres required the intervention. Subsequently, Ahmed et al Reference Ahmed, Advani and Moreira99 published one of the first systematic reviews on multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children to mention that prevalence was closer to 4.4%. Our meta-analysis revealed a pool prevalence of 2.2% (95% CI 1.7%, 2.8%) [Supplementary Figure 6Sa]. This value is half as frequent likely because as more waves of COVID-19 have passed, there has been increased awareness of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, improvements of its management, and a decline in the severe outcomes of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. Reference Miller, Zambrano and Yousaf27 As a result, reviews have observed a mortality of ∼1–2%. Reference Alsaied, Tremoulet and Burns23,Reference Kaushik, Gupta, Sood, Sharma and Verma100,Reference Hejazi, Loke and Harahsheh101 which is in concord with our prevalence of 2.2% (95% CI 1.7%, 2.7%) [Supplementary Figure 7Sa].

Strengths and Limitations

We evaluated 94 studies using a uniform definition of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children thus providing a robust sample to calculate the precise prevalence of different cardiac manifestations. Additionally, we had a high proportion of articles with a low risk of bias and a high heterogeneity. Limitations include that most studies chosen involved retrospective data. And as for all meta-analyses, our findings were limited by the quality of evidence of the studies included. There was heterogeneity in how some outcomes were described and reported. For example, the definition of myocarditis was frequently based on clinical assessment and rarely on MRI. Due to differences in the definition of left ventricular systolic dysfunction and imaging strategies chosen, it is possible that not all patients with suspected myocarditis were systematically screened thus underestimating the true prevalence. Also, the use of brain natriuretic peptide or troponin in assessing myocardial involvement can be misleading as both can increase from sepsis. Additionally, each paper referenced a different range of normal depending on the institution’s lab. The extent of our findings from electrocardiography is also hindered by the lack of consistent reporting from multiple groups.

Conclusions

In a meta-analysis and systematic review of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children literature, we assessed the most common cardiac manifestations of these critically ill children. We determined a prevalence of cardiac complications from a population of 14,932 patients. Among those admitted to a critical care unit for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, half required vasoactive support, one-third had left ventricular systolic dysfunction, one-third had myocarditis, one quarter had electrocardiographic abnormalities, one-sixth had coronary abnormalities, and 2% required extracorporeal support with an overall mortality rate of 2%. Further research is still critical in determining the appropriate long-term follow-up and consequences, especially in those with coronary abnormalities and myocarditis which might persist for months. Appropriate cardiac re-examinations with specific imaging modalities may ensure the safety of children in otherwise apprehensive families as these cardiac sequelae resolve.

Supplementary material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.1017/S104795112300015X

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Emily Ansusinha, MA (Children’s National Hospital, Washington DC) and Dr Ryan Dunne (Stony Brook Medicine, NY) for data gathering. We thank Nancy Aldrich, MLIS (Advent Health Orlando) for her assistance in conducting the initial literature search. We would like to thank Dr Fatma Levent (Advent Health Orlando) for the original idea prompting this manuscript to be undertaken. We are grateful to Dr Christopher Snyder (Children’s Hospital of Richmond) for his expertise and review of the manuscript. We would like to acknowledge all the authors who provided additional information that allowed us to perform this meta-analysis. In particular, we would like to thank Susanna Felsenstein (Alder Hey Children’s NHS Foundation Trust Hospital, Liverpool), Ashraf Harahsheh (Children’s National Hospital, Washington DC), Ahmet Vedat Kavurt (Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey), Pui Lee (Boston Children’s Hospital, Massachusetts), Fernanda Lima-Setta (Instituto D’Or de Pesquisa e Ensino (IDOR), Departamento de Pediatria, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), Daisuke Matsubara (The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), Carmen Nino-Taravilla (Clinica INDISA, Chile), and Orkun Tolunay (University of Health Sciences Adana City Training and Research Hospital, Turkey) for the exceptional amount of time spent to provide the requested data.

Financial support

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Conflicts of interest

None.

References

Clark, BC, Sanchez-de-Toledo, J, Bautista-Rodriguez, C, et al. Cardiac abnormalities seen in pediatric patients during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic: an international experience. J Am Heart Assoc 2020; 9: e018007. DOI 10.1161/JAHA.120.018007.10.1161/JAHA.120.018007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kavurt, AV, Bağrul, D, Gül, AEK, et al. Echocardiographic findings and correlation with laboratory values in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) associated with COVID-19. Pediatr Cardiol 2022; 43: 413–425. DOI 10.1007/s00246-021-02738-3.10.1007/s00246-021-02738-3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kıymet, E, Böncüoğlu, E, Şahinkaya, Ş., et al. A comparative study of children with MIS-C between admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit and pediatric ward: a one-year retrospective study. J Trop Pediatr 2021; 67: fmab104. DOI 10.1093/tropej/fmab104.10.1093/tropej/fmab104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García-Salido, A, the Spanish Pediatric Intensive Care Society working group on SARS-CoV-2 infection, de Carlos Vicente, JC, et al. Severe manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 in children and adolescents: from COVID-19 pneumonia to multisystem inflammatory syndrome: a multicentre study in pediatric intensive care units in Spain. Crit Care 2020; 24: 666. DOI 10.1186/s13054-020-03332-4.10.1186/s13054-020-03332-4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kobayashi, R, Dionne, A, Ferraro, A, et al. Detailed assessment of left ventricular function in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, using strain analysis. CJC Open 2021; 3: 880–887. DOI 10.1016/j.cjco.2021.02.012.10.1016/j.cjco.2021.02.012CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Diniz, MFR, Cardoso, MF, Sawamura, KSS, et al. O Coração de Pacientes Pediátricos com COVID-19: Novos Insights a Partir de um Estudo Ecocardiográfico Sistemático em um Hospital Terciário no Brasil. Arq Bras Cardiol 2021; 10. 10.36660/abc.20200920.Google Scholar
Capone, CA, Subramony, A, Sweberg, T, et al. Characteristics, cardiac involvement, and outcomes of multisystem inflammatory syndrome of childhood associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. J Pediatr 2020; 224: 141–145. DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.06.044.10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.06.044CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suresh Kumar, A, Awasthi, P, Thakur, A, et al. Intensive care needs and short-term outcome of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C): experience from North India. J Trop Pediatr 2021; 67: fmab055. DOI 10.1093/tropej/fmab055.10.1093/tropej/fmab055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dionne, A, Mah, DY, Son, MBF, et al. Atrioventricular block in children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome. Pediatrics 2020; 146: e2020009704. DOI 10.1542/peds.2020-009704.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Erol, N, Sari, E. Cardiac involvement in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children cases. Cardiol Young 2021; 17: 1–6. DOI 10.1017/S1047951121004911.Google Scholar
de Caro-Patón, GL, de Azagra-Garde, AM, García-Salido, A, Cabrero-Hernández, M, Tamariz, A, Nieto-Moro, M. Shock and myocardial injury in children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection: what we know. Case series and review of the literature. J Intensive Care Med 2021; 36: 392–403. DOI 10.1177/0885066620969350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abdel-Haq, N, Asmar, BI, Deza Leon, MP, et al. SARS-CoV-2-associated multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: clinical manifestations and the role of infliximab treatment. Eur J Pediatr 2021; 180: 1581–1591. DOI 10.1007/s00431-021-03935-1.10.1007/s00431-021-03935-1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldstein, LR, Rose, EB, Horwitz, SM, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in U.S. children and adolescents. N Engl J Med 2020; 383: 334–346. DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa2021680.10.1056/NEJMoa2021680CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jhaveri, S, Ahluwalia, N, Kaushik, S, et al. Longitudinal echocardiographic assessment of coronary arteries and left ventricular function following multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. J Pediatr 2021; 228: 290–293.e1. DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.08.002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gün, E, Kendirli, T, Botan, E, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children admitted to a tertiary pediatric intensive care unit. J Pediatr Intensive Care 2021; 11: s-0041-1733943. DOI 10.1055/s-0041-1733943.Google Scholar
Lima-Setta, F, Magalhães-Barbosa, MC, Rodrigues-Santos, G, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Brazil: a multicenter, prospective cohort study. J Pediatr (Rio J) 2021; 97: 354–361. DOI 10.1016/j.jped.2020.10.008.10.1016/j.jped.2020.10.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minocha, PK, Phoon, CKL, Verma, S, Singh, RK. Cardiac findings in pediatric patients with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children associated with COVID-19. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2021; 60: 119–126. DOI 10.1177/0009922820961771.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldstein, LR, Tenforde, MW, Friedman, KG, et al. Characteristics and outcomes of US children and adolescents with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) compared with severe acute COVID-19. JAMA 2021; 325: 1074. DOI 10.1001/jama.2021.2091.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Racko, I, Smane, L, Klavina, L, Pucuka, Z, Roge, I, Pavare, J. Case series of multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) in children during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Latvia. Clin Pract 2021; 11: 363–373. DOI 10.3390/clinpract11020051.10.3390/clinpract11020051CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shabab, J, Dubisky, A, Singh, A, Crippen, M, Abulaban, K, Aldrich, A. A descriptive study on multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children in a single center in West Michigan. Pediatr Rheumatol 2021; 19: 172. DOI 10.1186/s12969-021-00658-3.10.1186/s12969-021-00658-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sözeri, B, Çağlayan, Ş., Atasayan, V, et al. The clinical course and short-term health outcomes of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children in the single pediatric rheumatology center. Postgrad Med 2021; 133: 994–1000. DOI 10.1080/00325481.2021.1987732.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramcharan, T, Nolan, O, Lai, CY, et al. Paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome: temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PIMS-TS): cardiac features, management and short-term outcomes at a UK tertiary paediatric hospital. Pediatr Cardiol 2020; 41: 1391–1401. DOI 10.1007/s00246-020-02391-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alsaied, T, Tremoulet, AH, Burns, JC, et al. Review of cardiac involvement in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. Circulation 2021; 143: 78–88. DOI 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.049836.10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.049836CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Regan, W, O’Byrne, L, Stewart, K, et al. Electrocardiographic changes in children with multisystem inflammation associated with COVID-19. J Pediatr 2021; 234: 27–32.e2. DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.12.033.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belay, ED, Abrams, J, Oster, ME, et al. Trends in geographic and temporal distribution of US children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Pediatr 2021; 175: 837. DOI 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.0630.10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.0630CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowen, A, Miller, AD, Zambrano, LD, et al. Demographic and clinical factors associated with death among persons <21 years old with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children—United States, February 2020-March 2021. Open Forum Infect Dis 2021; 8: ofab388. DOI 10.1093/ofid/ofab388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, AD, Zambrano, LD, Yousaf, AR, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children—United States, February 2020–July 2021. Clin Infect Dis 2021; 5: ciab1007. DOI 10.1093/cid/ciab1007.Google Scholar
Sirico, D, Basso, A, Reffo, E, et al. Early echocardiographic and cardiac MRI findings in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. J Clin Med 2021; 10: 3360. DOI 10.3390/jcm10153360.10.3390/jcm10153360CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayden, JA, van der Windt, DA, Cartwright, JL, Côté, P, Bombardier, C. Assessing bias in studies of prognostic factors. Ann Intern Med 2013; 158: 280. DOI 10.7326/0003-4819-158-4-201302190-00009.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barendregt, JJ, Doi, SA, Lee, YY, Norman, RE, Vos, T. Meta-analysis of prevalence. J Epidemiol Community Health 2013; 67: 974–978. DOI 10.1136/jech-2013-203104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DerSimonian, R, Kacker, R. Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: an update. Contemp Clin Trials 2007; 28: 105–114. DOI 10.1016/j.cct.2006.04.004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Retrieved July 2, 2022, from https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current Google Scholar
Belhadjer, Z, Méot, M, Bajolle, F, et al. Acute heart failure in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children in the context of global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Circulation 2020; 142: 429–436. DOI 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.048360.10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.048360CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blumfield, E, Levin, TL. COVID-19 in pediatric patients: a case series from the Bronx, NY. Pediatr Radiol 2020; 50: 1369–1374. DOI 10.1007/s00247-020-04782-2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cantarutti, N, Battista, V, Adorisio, R, et al. Cardiac manifestations in children with SARS-COV-2 infection: 1-year pediatric multicenter experience. Children 2021; 8: 717. DOI 10.3390/children8080717.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Choi, NH, Fremed, M, Starc, T, et al. MIS-C and cardiac conduction abnormalities. Pediatrics 2020; 146: e2020009738. DOI 10.1542/peds.2020-009738.10.1542/peds.2020-009738CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, P, Evans, C, Kanthimathinathan, HK, et al. Intensive care admissions of children with paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PIMS-TS) in the UK: a multicentre observational study. Lancet Child Adolesc Health 2020; 4: 669–677. DOI 10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30215-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimaud, M, Starck, J, Levy, M, et al. Acute myocarditis and multisystem inflammatory emerging disease following SARS-CoV-2 infection in critically ill children. Ann Intensive Care 2020; 10: 69. DOI 10.1186/s13613-020-00690-8.10.1186/s13613-020-00690-8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Öcal Demir, S, Tosun, Ö, Öztürk, K, et al. SARS-CoV-2 associated multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C). A single center’s experience. Minerva Pediatr 2021. DOI 10.23736/S2724-5276.21.06327-8.10.23736/S2724-5276.21.06327-8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mamishi, S, Movahedi, Z, Mohammadi, M, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in 45 children: a first report from Iran. Epidemiol Infect 2020; 148: e196. DOI 10.1017/S095026882000196X.10.1017/S095026882000196XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alkan, G, Sert, A, Oz, SKT, Emiroglu, M, Yılmaz, R. Clinical features and outcome of MIS-C patients: an experience from Central Anatolia. Clin Rheumatol 2021; 40: 4179–4189. DOI 10.1007/s10067-021-05754-z.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Felsenstein, S, Duong, P, Lane, S, Jones, C, Pain, CE, Hedrich, CM. Cardiac pathology and outcomes vary between Kawasaki disease and PIMS-TS. Clin Immunol 2021; 229: 108780. DOI 10.1016/j.clim.2021.108780.10.1016/j.clim.2021.108780CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abrams, JY, Oster, ME, Godfred-Cato, SE, et al. Factors linked to severe outcomes in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) in the USA: a retrospective surveillance study. Lancet Child Adolesc Health 2021; 5: 323–331. DOI 10.1016/S2352-4642(21)00050-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Harbi, S, Kazzaz, YM, Uddin, MS, et al. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C): a national multicenter cohort in Saudi Arabia. Curr Pediatr Res 2021; 25: 904–913.Google Scholar
Bar-Meir, M, Guri, A, Godfrey, ME, et al. Characterizing the differences between multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children and Kawasaki disease. Sci Rep 2021; 11: 13840. DOI 10.1038/s41598-021-93389-0.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basar, EZ, Division of Cardiology, Department of Pediatrics Kocaeli University, Kocaeli, Turkey, Sonmez, HE, et al. Multisystemic inflammatory syndrome in children associated with COVID-19: a single center experience in Turkey. Turk Arch Pediatr 2021; 56: 192–199. DOI 10.5152/TurkArchPediatr.2021.21018.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bautista-Rodriguez, C, Sanchez-de-Toledo, J, Clark, BC, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: an international survey. Pediatrics 2021; 147: e2020024554. DOI 10.1542/peds.2020-024554.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basu, S, Kim, EJ, Sharron, MP, et al. Strain echocardiography and myocardial dysfunction in critically ill children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome unrecognized by conventional echocardiography: a retrospective cohort analysis. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2022; 23: e145–e152. DOI 10.1097/PCC.0000000000002850.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belozerov, KE, Saint Petersburg State Pediatric Medical University, Saint Petersburg, Russia, Kupreeva, AD, et al. Heart injury in patients with multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with SARS-CоV-2: a description of a series of clinical cases. Pediatr J Named GN Speransky 2021; 100: 35–45. DOI 10.24110/0031-403X-2021-100-5-35-45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bermejo, IA, Bautista-Rodriguez, C, Fraisse, A, et al. Short-term sequelae of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children assessed by CMR. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2021; 14: 1666–1667. DOI 10.1016/j.jcmg.2021.01.035.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cattaneo, C, Drean, M, Subiros, M, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in children: a case series from Mayotte Island. J Pediatr Infect Dis Soc 2021; 10: 738–741. DOI 10.1093/jpids/piab011.10.1093/jpids/piab011CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, JC, Matsubara, D, Morgan, RW, et al. Skewed cytokine responses rather than the magnitude of the cytokine storm may drive cardiac dysfunction in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. J Am Heart Assoc 2021; 10: e021428. DOI 10.1161/JAHA.121.021428.10.1161/JAHA.121.021428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, EW, Zachariah, P, Gorelik, M, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome related to COVID-19 in previously healthy children and adolescents in New York City. JAMA 2020; 324: 294. DOI 10.1001/jama.2020.10374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dhanalakshmi, K, Venkataraman, A, Balasubramanian, S, et al. Epidemiological and clinical profile of pediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome — temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PIMS-TS) in Indian children. Indian Pediatr 2020; 57: 1010–1014. DOI 10.1007/s13312-020-2025-1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dufort, EM, Koumans, EH, Chow, EJ, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children in New York State. N Engl J Med 2020; 383: 347–358. DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa2021756.10.1056/NEJMoa2021756CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Felsenstein, S, Willis, E, Lythgoe, H, et al. Presentation, treatment response and short-term outcomes in paediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PIMS-TS). J Clin Med 2020; 9: 3293. DOI 10.3390/jcm9103293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haslak, F, Barut, K, Durak, C, et al. Clinical features and outcomes of 76 patients with COVID-19-related multi-system inflammatory syndrome in children. Clin Rheumatol 2021; 40: 4167–4178. DOI 10.1007/s10067-021-05780-x.10.1007/s10067-021-05780-xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harahsheh, AS, Krishnan, A, DeBiasi, RL, et al. Cardiac echocardiogram findings of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2-associated multi-system inflammatory syndrome in children. Cardiol Young 2022; 32: 718–726. DOI 10.1017/S1047951121003024.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jain, S, Sen, S, Lakshmivenkateshiah, S, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children with COVID-19 in Mumbai. India Indian Pediatr 2020; 57: 1015–1019. DOI 10.1007/s13312-020-2026-0.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaushik, S, Aydin, SI, Derespina, KR, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection (MIS-C): a multi-institutional study from New York City. J Pediatr 2020; 224: 24–29. DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.06.045.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kostik, MM, Bregel, LV, Avrusin, IS, et al. Distinguishing between multisystem inflammatory syndrome, associated with COVID-19 in children and the Kawasaki disease: development of preliminary criteria based on the data of the retrospective multicenter cohort study. Front Pediatr 2021; 9: 787353. DOI 10.3389/fped.2021.787353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kucera, F, Laurence, C, Simmonds, J, et al. Cardiac outcomes in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2-associated multisystem inflammatory syndrome at a tertiary paediatric hospital. Cardiol Young 2021; 10: 1–7. DOI 10.1017/S104795112100456X.Google Scholar
Lee, PY, Day-Lewis, M, Henderson, LA, et al. Distinct clinical and immunological features of SARS-CoV-2-induced multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. J Clin Invest 2020; 130: 5942–5950. DOI 10.1172/JCI141113.10.1172/JCI141113CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matsubara, D, Kauffman, HL, Wang, Y, et al. Echocardiographic findings in pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with COVID-19 in the United States. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020; 76: 1947–1961. DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.08.056.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mohsin, SS, Abbas, Q, Chowdhary, D, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) in Pakistani children: a description of the phenotypes and comparison with historical cohorts of children with Kawasaki disease and myocarditis. PLoS One 2021; 16: e0253625. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0253625.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niño-Taravilla, C, Otaola-Arca, H, Lara-Aguilera, N, Zuleta-Morales, Y, Ortiz-Fritz, P. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, Chile, May–August 2020. Emerg Infect Dis 2021; 27: 1457–1461. DOI 10.3201/eid2705.204591.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ozsurekci, Y, Gürlevik, S, Kesici, S, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children during the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey: first report from the Eastern Mediterranean. Clin Rheumatol 2021; 40: 3227–3237. DOI 10.1007/s10067-021-05631-9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pereira, MFB, Litvinov, N, Farhat, SCL, et al. Severe clinical spectrum with high mortality in pediatric patients with COVID-19 and multisystem inflammatory syndrome. Clinics 2020; 75: e2209. DOI 10.6061/clinics/2020/e2209.10.6061/clinics/2020/e2209CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pick, J, Rao, MY, Dern, K, et al. Coronary artery changes in patients with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: Los Angeles experience. J Pediatr 2022; 240: 292–296. DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.09.026.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pouletty, M, Borocco, C, Ouldali, N, et al. Paediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 mimicking Kawasaki disease (Kawa-COVID-19): a multicentre cohort. Ann Rheum Dis 2020; 79: 999–1006. DOI 10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-217960.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rakha, S, Sobh, A, Hager, AH, et al. Cardiac implications of multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with COVID-19 in children under the age of 5 years. Cardiol Young 2022; 32: 800–805. DOI 10.1017/S1047951121003140.10.1017/S1047951121003140CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanil, Y, Misra, A, Safa, R, et al. Echocardiographic indicators associated with adverse clinical course and cardiac sequelae in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children with coronavirus disease 2019. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2021; 34: 862–876. DOI 10.1016/j.echo.2021.04.018.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Savas Sen, Z, Tanir, G, Gumuser Cinni, R, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children during severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 pandemic in Turkey: a single-centre experience. J Paediatr Child Health 2022; 58: 129–135. DOI 10.1111/jpc.15674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shobhavat, L, Solomon, R, Rao, S, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: clinical features and management—intensive care experience from a pediatric public hospital in Western India. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020; 24: 1089–1094.Google ScholarPubMed
Son, MBF, Murray, N, Friedman, K, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children — initial therapy and outcomes. N Engl J Med 2021; 385: 23–34. DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa2102605.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Theocharis, P, Wong, J, Pushparajah, K, et al. Multimodality cardiac evaluation in children and young adults with multisystem inflammation associated with COVID-19. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2021; 22: 896–903. DOI 10.1093/ehjci/jeaa212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tibi, R, Hadash, A, Khoury, A, Butbul-Aviel, Y, Ben-Ari, J, Shavit, I. Emergency department levels of NT-proBNP and inotropic/vasoactive support in multi-inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C). Am J Emerg Med 2022; 56: 296–297. DOI 10.1016/j.ajem.2021.07.046.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tolunay, O, Çelik, Ü., Arslan, İ., et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) associated with COVID-19: a case series experience in a tertiary care hospital of Southern Turkey. J Trop Pediatr 2021; 67: fmab050. DOI 10.1093/tropej/fmab050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valverde, I, Singh, Y, Sanchez-de-Toledo, J, et al. Acute cardiovascular manifestations in 286 children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with COVID-19 infection in Europe. Circulation 2021; 143: 21–32. DOI 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.050065.10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.050065CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vukomanovic, VA, Krasic, S, Prijic, S, et al. Differences between pediatric acute myocarditis related and unrelated to SARS-CoV-2. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2021; 40: e173–e178. DOI 10.1097/INF.0000000000003094.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whittaker, E, Bamford, A, Kenny, J, et al. Clinical characteristics of 58 children with a pediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2. JAMA 2020; 324: 259. DOI 10.1001/jama.2020.10369.10.1001/jama.2020.10369CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Acevedo, L, Piñeres-Olave, BE, Niño-Serna, LF, et al. Mortality and clinical characteristics of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) associated with covid-19 in critically ill patients: an observational multicenter study (MISCO study). BMC Pediatr 2021; 21: 516. DOI 10.1186/s12887-021-02974-9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aeschlimann, FA, Misra, N, Hussein, T, et al. Myocardial involvement in children with post-COVID multisystem inflammatory syndrome: a cardiovascular magnetic resonance based multicenter international study—the CARDOVID registry. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2021; 23: 140. DOI 10.1186/s12968-021-00841-1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Capone, CA, Misra, N, Ganigara, M, et al. Six month follow-up of patients with multi-system inflammatory syndrome in children. Pediatrics 2021; 148: e2021050973. DOI 10.1542/peds.2021-050973.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Godfred-Cato, S, Tsang, CA, Giovanni, J, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in infants <12 months of age, United States, May 2020–January 2021. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2021; 40: 601–605. DOI 10.1097/INF.0000000000003149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Torres, JP, Izquierdo, G, Acuña, M, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C): report of the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of cases in Santiago de Chile during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Int J Infect Dis 2020; 100: 75–81. DOI 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.08.062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben-Shimol, S, Livni, G, Megged, O, et al. COVID-19 in a subset of hospitalized children in Israel. J Pediatr Infect Dis Soc 2021; 10: 757–765. DOI 10.1093/jpids/piab035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagri, NK, Deepak, RK, Meena, S, et al. Outcomes of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children temporally related to COVID-19: a longitudinal study. Rheumatol Int 2022; 42: 477–484. DOI 10.1007/s00296-021-05030-y.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elilarasi, S, Poovazhagi, V, Kumaravel, G, Srividya, VG, Solomon, JRS. Pediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2. Indian J Pediatr 2021; 24: 879–884. DOI 10.1007/s12098-021-03954-8.Google Scholar
Fabi, M, Filice, E, Biagi, C, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome following SARS-CoV-2 infection in children: one year after the onset of the pandemic in a high-incidence area. Viruses 2021; 13: 2022. DOI 10.3390/v13102022.10.3390/v13102022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farooqi, KM, Chan, A, Weller, RJ, et al. Longitudinal outcomes for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. Pediatrics 2021; 148: e2021051155. DOI 10.1542/peds.2021-051155.10.1542/peds.2021-051155CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeBiasi, RL, Harahsheh, AS, Srinivasalu, H, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome of children: subphenotypes, risk factors, biomarkers, cytokine profiles, and viral sequencing. J Pediatr 2021; 237: 125–135.e18. DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.06.002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harahsheh, AS, Sharron, MP, Bost, JE, Ansusinha, E, Wessel, D, DeBiasi, RL. Comparison of first and second wave cohorts of multisystem inflammatory disease syndrome in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2022; 41: e21–e25. DOI 10.1097/INF.0000000000003388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kolganova, NI, Zvereva, NN, Karpenko, MA, et al. Clinical, laboratory and instrumental characteristics, course and therapy of children’s multisistem inflammatory syndrome associated with Covid-19. Pediatriya Zhurnal im G.N. Speranskogo 2020; 99: 73–83.Google Scholar
Swann, OV, Holden, KA, Turtle, L, et al. Clinical characteristics of children and young people admitted to hospital with covid-19 in United Kingdom: prospective multicentre observational cohort study. BMJ 2020; 27: m3249. DOI 10.1136/bmj.m3249.10.1136/bmj.m3249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiwari, A, Balan, S, Rauf, A, et al. COVID-19 related multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C): a hospital-based prospective cohort study from Kerala, India. BMJ Paediatr Open 2021; 5: e001195. DOI 10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001195.10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001195CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Toubiana, J, Poirault, C, Corsia, A, et al. Kawasaki-like multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children during the covid-19 pandemic in Paris, France: prospective observational study. BMJ 2020; 3: m2094. DOI 10.1136/bmj.m2094.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yagnam, RF, Izquierdo, CG, Villena, MR, Gonzalez, MC, Drago, TM. Síndrome Inflamatorio Multisistémico Pediátrico asociado a COVID-19: características clínicas y manejo en una Unidad de Paciente Crítico Pediátrico. Andes Pediatr 2021; 92: 395. DOI 10.32641/andespediatr.v92i3.3333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahmed, M, Advani, S, Moreira, A, et al. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: a systematic review. EClinicalMedicine 2020; 26: 100527. DOI 10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100527.10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100527CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaushik, A, Gupta, S, Sood, M, Sharma, S, Verma, S. A systematic review of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2020; 39: e340–e346. DOI 10.1097/INF.0000000000002888.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hejazi, OI, Loke, YH, Harahsheh, AS. Short-term cardiovascular complications of multi-system inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) in adolescents and children. Curr Pediatr Rep 2021; 9: 93–103. DOI 10.1007/s40124-021-00258-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caforio, ALP, Pankuweit, S, Arbustini, E, et al. Current state of knowledge on aetiology, diagnosis, management, and therapy of myocarditis: a position statement of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Myocardial and Pericardial Diseases. Eur Heart J 2013; 34: 2636–2648. DOI 10.1093/eurheartj/eht210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patnaik, S, Jain, MK, Ahmed, S, et al. Short-term outcomes in children recovered from multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Rheumatol Int 2021; 41: 1957–1962. DOI 10.1007/s00296-021-04932-1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Türe, M, Kan, A, Akın, A, Yılmaz, K, Şen, V. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: a single-center experience. Pediatr Int 2021; 63: 1062–1068.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Figure 1. PRISMA study flow diagram, showing the total number of references that were screened, the reasons to exclude the references that made it to full-text screening, and the number of references that were included.

Supplementary material: File

Carmona et al. supplementary material

Carmona et al. supplementary material

Download Carmona et al. supplementary material(File)
File 5.1 MB