Association between ABO blood type and coronavirus disease 2019 severe outcomes across dominant variant strains

Author:

Mielke Nicholas1ORCID,Gorz Rebecca2,Bahl Amit2,Zhao Lili3,Berger David A2

Affiliation:

1. Department of Medicine Creighton University School of Medicine Omaha Nebraska USA

2. Department of Emergency Medicine Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital Royal Oak Michigan USA

3. Department of Clinical Research Corewell Health Research Institute Royal Oak Michigan USA

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesExisting evidence suggests a link between ABO blood type and severe outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). We aimed to assess the relationship between blood type and severe outcomes across variant strains throughout the pandemic.MethodsThis was a multicenter retrospective observational cohort analysis from a large health system in southeastern Michigan using electronic medical records to evaluate emergency encounters, hospitalization, and severe outcomes in COVID‐19 based on ABO blood type. Consecutive adult patients presenting to the emergency department with a primary diagnosis of COVID‐19 (U07.1) from March 1, 2020 through December 31, 2022 were assessed. Patients who presented during three distinct time intervals that coincided with Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variant predominance were included in the analysis. Exclusions included no record of ABO blood type, positive PCR COVID‐19 test within the preceding 28 days, and if transferred from out of the health system. Severe outcomes were inclusive of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, or death, which, as a composite, represented our primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were hospital admission and length of stay. A logistic regression model was employed to test the association between ABO blood type and severe outcome, adjusting for age, sex, race, vaccination status, Elixhauser comorbidity indices, and the dominant variant time period in which the encounter occurred.ResultsOf the 33,796 COVID‐19 encounters, 9416 met inclusion criteria; 4071 (43.2%) were type O, 3417 (36.3%) were type A, 459 (4.9%) were type AB, and 1469 (15.6%) were type B blood. Note that 66.4% of the cohort was female (p = 0.18). The proportion of composite severe disease among the four blood types was similar and ranged between 8.6% and 8.9% (p = 0.98). Note that 53.0% of type A blood patients required hospital admission, compared to 51.9%, 50.4%, and 48.1% of type AB, B, and O blood, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared to patients with O blood type (43.2%), non‐O blood type (58.8%; composite of A, AB, and B) exhibited no statistically significant difference in the proportion of composite severe disease (8.8% vs. 8.7%; p = 0.81) Multivariable regression analyses exhibited no significant difference regarding the presence of severe outcomes among the four blood types or O versus non‐O blood types during T1, T2, and T3.ConclusionsABO blood type was not associated with COVID‐19 severe outcomes across the Delta, Alpha, and Omicron dominant COVID waves across a large health system in southeastern Michigan. Further research is needed to better understand if ABO blood type is a risk factor for severe disease among evolving COVID‐19 variants and other viral upper respiratory infections.

Publisher

Wiley

Reference36 articles.

1. First Case of 2019 Novel Coronavirus in the United States

2. WHO Coronavirus (COVID‐19) Dashboard. WHO coronavirus (COVID‐19) dashboard with vaccination data. Accessed August 19 2023.https://covid19.who.int/

3. MurphySL KochanekKD XuJ AriasE Mortality in the United States 2020 key findings data from the National Vital Statistics System. 2020. Accessed December 25 2022.https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/index.htm

4. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.COVID‐19 public health emergency. Accessed August 19 2023.https://www.hhs.gov/coronavirus/covid‐19‐public‐health‐emergency/index.html

5. COVID-19 Surveillance After Expiration of the Public Health Emergency Declaration ― United States, May 11, 2023

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3