Prevalence and Contributing Factors of Gender-based Violence in SAARC Territories from 2010 to 2020: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gender-based violence is a key global concern due to the high prevalence and increased socio-economic burden for survivors. However, estimation of the prevalence of gender-based violence is difficult due to differences in study design and underreporting of abuse, especially in developing nations. Therefore, we conducted this study to estimate the prevalence of Gender-based violence among women living in the SAARC region. METHODS: The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020219577). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed throughout the review. A thorough database search was conducted to identify studies done in the SAARC region. Title and abstract screening were done in Covidence, followed by a full-text review. Data were extracted and pooled for analysis using the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Subgroup analysis was done where possible. RESULTS: A total of 76 studies were included in the systematic review and metaanalysis. The community prevalence of domestic violence (DV) was 43.8% (95% CI, 35.1% - 52.9%), GBV prevalence was 34.9% (95% CI, 30.2% - 39.9%) and IPV prevalence was 39.8% (95% CI, 30.7% - 49.6%). GBV prevalence was highest in illiterate women [54.2% (95% CI, 46.8% - 61.5%)] and lowest among women with higher than secondary level education [23.1% (95% CI, 16.2% - 32.0%)]. The prevalence of GBV among women in pregnancy or postpartum period was 32.3% (95% CI, 25.1% - 40.4%, I2: 98.64), while among female sexual workers, the prevalence of Gender-based violence was 42.1% (95% CI, 28.1% - 57.5%, I2: 99.25). CONCLUSIONS: There is a high prevalence of Gender-based violence in the SAARC region. Higher socioeconomic status and educational status are protective factors for Gender-based violence. However, more studies using validated tools are needed to understand the true extent of the problem.

Prevalence and Risk Factors of COPD in Nepal: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease is a common, preventable, and treatable disease. Here, we conducted a systematic review of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and its risk factors in Nepal for the last two decades. METHODS: We systematically searched databases to find all relevant Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease research papers from 2000 to 2020. Two reviewers screened the literature using Covidence based on the study protocol. Data extraction was done using Microsoft Excel from selected studies. Final data analysis was done using CMA v.3. Our review protocol is available in PROSPERO (CRD42020215486) on 20 November 2020. RESULTS: The database search revealed 1416 studies of which 13 were included in quantitative analysis. The prevalence of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in the adult population was 22·7% (CI, 12·5-37·7) of whom 54·9% were female (CI, 51·9-57·9). Nearly three-fourth of the participants (73·1%) of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients had informal education (CI, 58·6-84·0). The commonest primary occupation was agriculture and farming in 39·4% (CI, 31·3-48·2), followed by homemaker (36·8%). It was observed that 28·5% of the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients were former smokers, 25·8% non-smokers, and 59·4% were current smokers. More than two-third (76·2%) of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients relied upon traditional firewood cooking, whereas only 14.6% was adopted fireless cooking. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled prevalence of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Nepal was significantly high with more cases in females compared to males. Smoking and traditional firewood cooking were major risk factors among Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease cases in Nepal.

Impact of COVID-19 on the Gastrointestinal Tract: A Clinical Review.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly throughout the world, causing a pandemic that has resulted in more than 5 million deaths globally. The gastrointestinal (GI) tract is known to have high expression of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors in the human body, making it prone to direct damage from the cellular invasion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Numerous GI symptoms have been reported among patients with COVID-19. This systemic review details the mechanism and effects of COVID-19 on the GI tract along with the hepatobiliary and pancreatic systems.

Belimumab in Lupus Nephritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Belimumab is a recombinant human IgG-1λ monoclonal antibody. It inhibits the B-cell activating factor (BAFF) and is approved for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) older than five years with positive autoantibody. We aimed to evaluate the role of belimumab in the maintenance phase of treatment for lupus nephritis (LN). PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched using appropriate keywords. The screening of title and abstract was done in Covidence, followed by data extraction of the relevant studies based on inclusion criteria. Review manager (RevMan 5.4) was used for data analysis with random or fixed effects model based on heterogeneities. Two randomized controlled trials were included in the quantitative analysis. There were 1.71 times higher odds of complete renal response in the belimumab group than in the control group (odds ratio (OR), 1.71; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.12-2.60; I-square (I2) ​​​​= 0%). Similarly, there was 34% lower odds for having no response among the belimumab group (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.96; I2 = 0%). No significant differences between the two groups were observed for the occurrence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.74-1.56; I2 = 0%), treatment-related serious adverse events (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.15-1.96; I2 = 68%), and treatment-related infections (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.27-1.55; I2 = 21%).Therefore, belimumab and standard treatment were instrumental for beneficial renal response in patients with lupus nephritis and were not associated with increased odds of adverse effect compared with the standard treatment alone.

Vesico-Vaginal Fistula in Females in 2010-2020: a Systemic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In the Western world today, urogenital fistula, including vesicovaginal fistula (VVF), is rare. However, while it remains significant in developing parts of the world due to prolonged and obstructed labor, in this study, we systematically reviewed the existing literature, discussing VVF occurrence, its etiology, and outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used electronic databases to search relevant articles from 2010-2020. The screening was performed with the help of Covidence. Relevant data from included studies were extracted in excel sheets, and final analysis was done using CMA-3 using proportion with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Fifteen studies reported the VVF among the fistula series. The pooled result showed 76.57% cases of VVF (CI, 65.42-84.96), out of which 27.54% were trigonal, 55.70% supra-trigonal, and the rest with a varied description like circumferential, juxta-cervical, juxta-urethral. Obstetric etiology was commonly reported with 19.29% (CI, 13.26-27.21) with cesarean section and 31.14% (CI, 18.23-47.86) with obstructed labor. Hysterectomy was the commonly reported etiology among gynecological etiology (46.52%, CI; 36.17-57.19). Among different surgical treatments employed for fistula closure, 49.50% were by abdominal approach (CI, 37.23-61.82), and 42.31% by vaginal approach (CI, 31.82-53.54). Successful closure of fistula was reported in 87.09% of the surgeries (CI, 84.39-89.38). CONCLUSION: The vesicovaginal fistula is the most common type of genitourinary fistula. Major causes of fistula are gynecological surgery, obstructed labor, and cesarean section. The vaginal approach and abdominal are common modalities of repair of fistula with favorable outcomes in the majority of the patients.

Pulmonary barotrauma in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: An ever-increasing number of studies have reported an increased incidence of spontaneous pulmonary barotrauma such as pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, and subcutaneous emphysema in patients with COVID-19. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the value and significance of the available data. METHODS: A thorough systematic search was conducted to identify studies of barotrauma in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Data analysis of case reports was done using a statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS) version 22, and meta-analysis was performed using CMA-3. RESULTS: We identified a total of 4488 studies after thorough database searching.118 case reports and series, and 15 observational studies were included in the qualitative analysis. Fifteen studies were included in the quantitative analysis. The observational studies reported barotrauma in 4.2% (2.4-7.3%) among hospitalized patients; 15.6% (11-21.8%) among critically ill patients; and 18.4% (13-25.3%) in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, showing a linear relationship of barotrauma with the severity of the disease. In addition, barotrauma was associated with a longer length of hospital stay, more extended ICU stay, and higher in-hospital mortality. Also, a slightly higher odds of barotrauma was seen in COVID-19 ARDS compared with non-COVID-19 ARDS. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 pneumonia is associated with a higher incidence of barotrauma. It presents unique challenges for invasive and non-invasive ventilation management. Further studies are required to unravel the underlying pathophysiology and develop safer management strategies.

Vitamin C in Critically Ill Patients: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin C is a water-soluble antioxidant vitamin. Oxidative stress and its markers, along with inflammatory markers, are high during critical illness. Due to conflicting results of the published literature regarding the efficacy of vitamin C in critically ill patients, and especially the concerns for nephrotoxicity raised by some case reports, this meta-analysis was carried out to appraise the evidence and affirmation regarding the role of vitamin C in critically ill patients. METHODS: We searched the database thoroughly to collect relevant studies that assessed intravenous vitamin C use in critically ill patients published until 25 February 2021. We included randomized controlled trials and observational studies with 20 or more critically ill patients who have received intravenous ascorbic acid (vitamin C). After screening 18,312 studies from different databases, 53 were included in our narrative synthesis, and 48 were included in the meta-analysis. We used the Covidence software for screening of the retrieved literature. Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4 was used for the pooling of data and Odds Ratios (OR) and Mean difference (MD) as measures of effects with a 95% confidence interval to assess for explanatory variables. RESULTS: Pooling data from 33 studies for overall hospital mortality outcomes using a random-effect model showed a 19% reduction in odds of mortality among the vitamin C group (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.66-0.98). Length of hospital stay (LOS), mortality at 28/30 days, ICU mortality, new-onset AKI and Renal Replacement Therapy (RRT) for AKI did not differ significantly across the two groups. Analysis of data from 30 studies reporting ICU stay disclosed 0.76 fewer ICU days in the vitamin C group than the placebo/standard of care (SOC) group (95% CI, -1.34 to -0.19). This significance for shortening ICU stay persisted even when considering RCTs only in the analysis (MD, -0.70; 95% CI, -1.39 to -0.02). CONCLUSION: Treatment of critically ill patients with intravenous vitamin C was relatively safe with no significant difference in adverse renal events and decreased in-hospital mortality. The use of vitamin C showed a significant reduction in the length of ICU stays in critically ill patients.

New-onset diabetes in COVID-19 and clinical outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with adverse clinical outcomes and high mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The relationship between diabetes and COVID-19 is known to be bidirectional. AIM: To analyze the rate of new-onset diabetes in COVID-19 patients and compare the clinical outcomes of new-onset diabetes, pre-existing diabetes, hyperglycemic, and non-diabetes among COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We used the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology statement for the present meta-analysis. Online databases were searched for all peer-reviewed articles published until November 6, 2020. Articles were screened using Covidence and data extracted. Further analysis was done using comprehensive meta-analysis. Among the 128 studies detected after thorough database searching, seven were included in the quantitative analysis. The proportion was reported with 95% confidence interval (CI) and heterogeneity was assessed using I 2. RESULTS: Analysis showed that 19.70% (CI: 10.93-32.91) of COVID-19 patients had associated DM, and 25.23% (CI: 19.07-32.58) had associated hyperglycemia. The overall mortality rate was 15.36% (CI: 12.57-18.68) of all COVID-19 cases, irrespective of their DM status. The mortality rate was 9.26% among non-diabetic patients, 10.59% among patients with COVID-19 associated hyperglycemia, 16.03% among known DM patients, and 24.96% among COVID-19 associated DM patients. The overall occurrence of adverse events was 20.52% (CI: 14.21-28.70) among COVID-19 patients in the included studies, 15.29% among non-diabetic patients, 20.41% among patients with COVID-19 associated hyperglycemia, 20.69% among known DM patients, and 45.85% among new-onset DM. Meta-regression showed an increasing rate of mortality among new hyperglycemic patients, known diabetics, and new-onset DM patients in comparison to those without diabetes. CONCLUSION: A significantly higher rate of new onset DM and hyperglycemia was observed. Higher mortality rates and adverse events were seen in patients with new-onset DM and hyperglycemia than in the non-diabetic population.

Prevalence of Chronic Kidney Disease, Its Risk Factors and Outcome in Nepal: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension, diabetes, glomerulonephritis, obesity, and family history of kidney diseases are major risk factors for chronic kidney disease. Due to the paucity of data on a national level regarding the prevalence, risk factors, and complications of chronic kidney disease, we performed this meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched online databases from January 2000 till October 2020. Two reviewers screened articles using Covidence software. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software version 3 was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Among chronic kidney disease patients, 35.96% were found to have high LDL, 34.22% had hypercholesterolemia, 39.18% had hypertriglyceridemia, and 42.23% had low HDL. Pigmentary changes were reported in 37.71%, pruritus in 30.96%; and xerosis in 48.55%. Among the reported nail problems, the brown nail was reported in 7.19%, half and half nail in 6.07%, and white nail in 20.65%. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of chronic kidney disease among high-risk cohorts in Nepal was significant among risk group with hypertension and diabetes being the most common risk factors. The most common stage of chronic kidney disease was Stage V, and the common complications were skin problems and dyslipidemia.

N-acetyl cysteine versus standard of care for non-acetaminophen induced acute liver injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The role of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) in the treatment of acetaminophen induced acute liver injury (ALI) is well established but its role in non-acetaminophen induced ALI is still elusive. We conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the role of NAC in non-acetaminophen induced ALI. We searched electronic databases for studies published till Oct 25, 2020. We used RevMan v5.4 software to analyze the data extracted from selected studies by using Covidence systematic review software. Outcome estimation was done using Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The heterogeneity in various studies was determined using the I2 test. A total of 11 studies were included in quantitative analysis. Use of NAC in non-acetaminophen induced ALI showed 53% reduction in mortality compared to standard of care (OR, 0.47; CI, 0.29-0.75) and reduced mean duration of hospital stay by 6.52 days (95% CI, -12.91 to -0.13). Similarly, the rate of encephalopathy was 59% lower in the treatment group (OR, 0.41; CI, 0.20-0.83). However, the risk of developing nausea and vomiting (OR, 3.99; CI, 1.42-11.19), and the need for mechanical ventilation (OR 3.88; CI, 1.14-13.29) were significantly higher in the treatment group. These findings conclude use of NAC decreases mortality and hepatic encephalopathy compared to standard of care in patients with non-acetaminophen induced ALI. Although there is an increased risk of nausea and vomiting with the use of NAC, the majority of adverse events are transient and minor.

Status of COVID-19 Patients and Associated Stigma After Discharge from Designated Health Facilities of Kathmandu Valley: A Telephonic Survey.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a highly contagious viral disease. The anxiety, misinformation about COVID-19, and the fear of being infected by the virus have led to widespread stigma in local communities. Thus, we conducted a study to evaluate the status of patients and disease-associated stigma of patients who recovered from COVID-19. METHODS: Status of discharged/ improved COVID-19 individuals were followed after their discharge within 2 months after COVID-19 status through telephonic interview. Data of interview was recorded in excel sheets, which was imported in Stata v. 15. Simple descriptive analysis performed and finding presented in appropriate tabulation. Further binomial logistic regression analysis was performed for post-treatment stigmatization. RESULTS: Among 365 case details retrieved, 262 cases contained contact details. Among them, 221 total phone calls were made, of which only 94 could reach for phone interview. 50 (53.19%) were male; 59 (62.77%) were married; and 85 (90.43%) were Hinduism by religion. Majority (n=74, 78.72%) were asymptomatic. The average hospital/isolation stay of patients was 11.23±4.75 days. Among interviewed individuals, 24 (25.81%) reported some type of stigmatization. Individuals with comorbidities and tested for travel purpose has less chance of stigmatization comparing than others. Higher the age in years and longer the duration of hospital/isolation stay; higher the odds of having stigmatization. CONCLUSIONS: High level of stigma was seen among COVID-19 survivors. The stigma associated with COVID-19 was shown to increase with age and length of hospital stay while the stigma decreased with the presence of co-morbidities and was tested for travel purposes.

Composite Anxiety-depression among Medical Undergraduates during COVID-19 Pandemic in a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: Fear and anxiety is a natural response during crisis. From constant worry of getting infected, death of loved ones, transitioning of lifestyle to loss of social connection; there can be several psychological triggers. The effect on mental health on the general population could be greater than those affected by the infection itself during the pandemic. Among medical students, who already have several other psychological afflictions, these triggers might be detrimental. Hence, this study aims to find out the prevalence of composite anxiety-depression among medical undergraduates in a tertiary care hospital. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among medical undergraduates in a tertiary care hospital from 20th December 2020 to 5th January 2021. Ethical approval was taken from the Institutional Review Committee. The sample size was calculated and convenient sampling was done. The data were entered in International Business Machines Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 20.0. Point estimate at 95% Confidence Interval was calculated along with frequency and proportion for binary data. RESULTS: Out of 315 participants on the Patient Health Questionnaire-Anxiety and Depression Scale, severe composite anxiety-depression was seen in 10 (3.17%) at 95% Confidence Interval (1.23-5.1) participants, moderate in 35 (11.11%) at 95% Confidence Interval (7.63-14.58) and mild in 98 (31.11%) at 95% Confidence Interval (25.99-36.22). And 172 (54.6%) at 95% Confidence Interval (49.1-60) were normal. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid rise of apprehension among people amidst infectious outbreaks can ensue and medical students are no exception. So, at this time of crisis, there is a need to protect their mental health and it should be emphasized and endorsed.

Pneumomediastinum and Subcutaneous Emphysema in an Adult Male From Nepal Infected With COVID-19.

Pneumomediastinum and subcutaneous emphysema have been reported in COVID-19 around the world except for Nepal. We report a case of a 44-year-old male infected with COVID-19 who developed pneumomediastinum and subcutaneous emphysema during his eighth day of intubation at the hospital. He was managed with remdesivir, antibiotics, mechanical ventilation, steroid, and heparin following which he recovered well. Barotrauma-related complications are common in COVID-19 and our case highlights the importance of conservative management for such complications and the rarity of such conditions in Nepal.

Prevalence of Anxiety, Depression, and Perceived Stigma in Healthcare Workers in Nepal During Later Phase of First Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic: A Web-Based Cross-Sectional Survey.

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has caused discrimination and social stigma among healthcare workers (HCW) causing psychological problems due to prolonged work shifts, uncertain pay, lack of personal protective equipment (PPE), added fear of infection to self or family, and so on. This online survey is directed towards the determination of anxiety, depression, and stigma among healthcare providers in Nepal during the later phase of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and methods Anxiety and depression were assessed using standard Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), respectively. Data for the survey were collected from January 10, 2021, to February 6, 2021, and analyzed using Stata 15 (College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC). Results A total of 213 participants were enrolled in the study from different parts of Nepal and their mean age was 29.90±6.43 years. The prevalence of anxiety and depression among healthcare workers was 46.95% and 41.31%, respectively. A bidirectional relationship was present between GAD-7 and PHQ-9 score interpretation. About 57% of HCW experienced some form of perceived stigmatization due to COVID-19. Frontline HCW were six times more likely to be stigmatized compared to non-front line HCWs and diagnosis of COVID-19 was associated with three times higher odds of facing perceived stigmatization. Conclusion A significant number of HCW experienced symptoms of anxiety and depression during the later phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontline HCW who were infected experienced a higher level of stigma.

Is Hydroxychloroquine with Azithromycin a Good Combination in COVID-19 Compared to Hydroxychloroquine Alone from Cardiac Perspective? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The global spread of COVID-19 and the lack of definite treatment have caused an alarming crisis in the world. We aimed to evaluate the outcome and potential harmful cardiac effects of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin compared to hydroxychloroquine alone for COVID-19 treatment. METHODS: PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, and World Health Organization clinical trial registry were searched using appropriate keywords and identified six studies using PRISMA guidelines. The quantitative synthesis was performed using fixed or random effects for the pooling of studies based on heterogeneities. RESULTS: The risk of mortality (RR=1.16; CI: 0.92-1.46) and adverse cardiac events (OR=1.06; CI: 0.82-1.37) demonstrated a small increment though of no significance. There were no increased odds of mechanical ventilation (OR=0.84; CI: 0.33-2.15) and significant QTc prolongation (OR=0.84, CI: 0.59-1.21). Neither the critical QTc threshold (OR=1.92, CI: 0.81-4.56) nor absolute ?QTc ?60ms (OR=1.95, CI:0.55-6.96) increased to the level of statistical significance among hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin arm compared to hydroxychloroquine alone, but the slightly increased odds need to be considered in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin leads to small increased odds of mortality and cardiac events compared to hydroxychloroquine alone. The use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin led to increased odds of QT prolongation, although not statistically significant.

Different aspects of convalescent plasma therapy for COVID-19 treatment; a critical review.

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) and is ominously threatening the survival of humankind on the whole planet. With a quick spread of the outbreak from its origin, Wuhan, China, to almost all over the world, it has affected more than seven million people to date, hence it has devastated every part of the infrastructural skeleton of governance. Continuously escalating disease burden and lack of proven therapeutic approaches are mounting challenges to health scientists and ultimately to healthcare providers. Although recent studies have shown benefits in decreasing the severity and duration of the illness and there are more benefits compared to risks, plasma therapy cannot be considered as a standard of care until the ongoing trials are completed and they establish definite evidence on its therapeutic efficacy and safety. Though a beneficial aspect may be there, acquiring donors and adequate availability of plasma is equally challenging, and its associated untoward effects related to biological therapeutic agents. The rational practice of CP therapy guided by risk-benefit judgment from aspects of donor and recipient can be a therapeutic option in such a global health crisis.

Remdesivir: A potential game-changer or just a myth? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: COVID-19 outbreak has created a public health catastrophe all over the world. Here, we have aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on remdesivir use for COVID-19. MAIN METHODS: We searched Pubmed, Scopus, Embase, and preprint sites and identified ten studies for qualitative and four studies for quantitative analysis using PRISMA guidelines. The quantitative synthesis was performed using fixed and random effect models in RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I-squared (I2) test. KEY FINDINGS: Comparing 10-day remdesivir group with placebo or standard of care (SOC) group, remdesivir reduced 14 days mortality (OR 0.61, CI 0.41-0.91), need for mechanical ventilation (OR 0.73, CI 0.54-0.97), and severe adverse effects (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.88). Clinical improvement on day 28 (OR 1.59, CI 1.06-2.39), day 14 clinical recovery (OR 1.48, CI 1.19-1.84), and day 14 discharge rate (OR 1.41, CI 1.15-1.73) were better among remdesivir group. Earlier clinical improvement (MD -2.51, CI -4.16 to -0.85); and clinical recovery (MD -4.69, CI -5.11 to -4.28) were seen among the remdesivir group. Longer course (10 days) of remdesivir showed a higher discharge rate at day 14 (OR 2.11, CI 1.50-2.97), but there were significantly higher rates of serious adverse effects, and drug discontinuation than the 5-day course. SIGNIFICANCE: Remdesivir showed a better 14 days mortality profile, clinical recovery, and discharge rate. Overall clinical improvement and clinical recovery were earlier among the remdesivir group. 10-day remdesivir showed more adverse outcome than 5-day course with no significant benefits.

Corticosteroids in COVID-19: Is it Rational? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Due to a lack of definitive treatment, many drugs were repurposed for Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) treatment; among them, corticosteroid is one. However, its benefit or harm while treating COVID-19 is not fully studied. Thus, we conducted this meta-analysis to assess the rationality on the use of corticosteroids in COVID-19. Pubmed, Medline, Clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane library, and Preprint publisher were searched. In the qualitative syntheses, 41, and quantitative studies, 40, were included using PRISMA guidelines. Assessment of heterogeneity was done using the I-squared (I 2) test and random/fixed effect analysis was done to determine the odds/risk ratio. We found severely ill COVID-19 patients almost 5 (OR 4.78, 2.76-8.26) times higher odds of getting corticosteroids during their treatment. Similarly, the odds for corticosteroids in addition to standard of care (SOC) were approximately 4 (OR 4.09, 1.89-8.84) times higher among intensive care unit (ICU) patients than non-ICU ones. A higher mortality risk with the corticosteroid-receiving group compared with the SOC alone (RR 2.01, 1.12-3.63) was observed. Neither increased discharge rate (RR 0.79, 0.63-0.99) nor recovery/improvement rate was shown among the corticosteroid-receiving group (OR 0.24, 0.13-0.43). Approximately, the overall 4-day longer hospital stay was found among the treatment groups (MD 4.19, 2.57-5.81). For the negative conversion of reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), approximately a 3-day (MD 2.42, 1.31-3.53) delay was observed with corticosteroid treatment cases. Our study concludes that more severe and critically ill patients tend to get corticosteroids, and the mortality risk increases with the use of corticosteroids. With the use of corticosteroids, delayed recovery and a longer hospital stay were observed.

Favipiravir versus other antiviral or standard of care for COVID-19 treatment: a rapid systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 causing coronavirus is an enveloped RNA virus that utilizes an enzyme RNA dependent RNA polymerase for its replication. Favipiravir (FVP) triphosphate, a purine nucleoside analog, inhibits that enzyme. We have conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis on efficacy and safety of the drug FVP as a treatment for COVID-19. METHODS: Databases like Pubmed, Pubmed Central, Scopus, Embase, Google Scholar, preprint sites, and clinicaltirals.gov were searched. The studies with the standard of care (SOC) and FVP as a treatment drug were considered as the treatment group and the SOC with other antivirals and supportive care as the control group. Quantitative synthesis was done using RevMan 5.4. Clinical improvement, negative conversion of reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), adverse effects, and oxygen requirements were studied. RESULTS: We identified a total of 1798 studies after searching the electronic databases. Nine in the qualitative studies and four studies in the quantitative synthesis met the criteria. There was a significant clinical improvement in the FVP group on the 14th day compared to the control group (RR 1.29, 1.08-1.54). Clinical deterioration rates were less likely in the FVP group though statistically not significant (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.30-1.14) at the endpoint of study (7-15 days). The meta-analysis showed no significant differences between the two groups on viral clearance (day 14: RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.84-1.33), non-invasive ventilation or oxygen requirement (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.42-1.39), and adverse effects (OR 0.69, 0.13-3.57). There are 31 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) registered in different parts of the world focusing FVP for COVID-19 treatment. CONCLUSION: There is a significant clinical and radiological improvement following treatment with FVP in comparison to the standard of care with no significant differences on viral clearance, oxygen support requirement and side effect profiles.

Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19: The Study Points to Premature Decisions on Efficacy While Bells Ringing for Safety.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been a global disease burden. It has affected more than sixteen million people in the world within seven months of its first outbreak in Wuhan. Different treatment modalities, therapeutic and prophylactic agents for its therapy are underway. Until the proven therapy gets available, repurposing of drugs is a better way out. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has been a potential recourse of treatment in this regard for COVID-19 management. As different episodes of cardiac adverse events of HCQ are reported, safety concerns are now a prime objective. The risk-benefit analysis is mandatory to address rational drug therapy even in such a global health crisis. In this article, we want to evaluate the safety and efficacy of HCQ in COVID-19 management.