A multicentre study on the incidence of respiratory viruses in children with community-acquired pneumonia requiring hospitalization in the setting of the zero-COVID policy in China.

BACKGROUND: Stringent nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been implemented worldwide to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, and the circulation and seasonality of common respiratory viruses have subsequently changed. There have been few multicentre studies or comparisons of the prevalence of respiratory viruses accounting for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in hospitalized children between the pre-COVID period and the period after community and school reopening in the setting of the zero-COVID policy. METHODS: We included 1543 children with CAP who required hospitalization from November 1, 2020 to April 30, 2021 (period 1), and 629 children with the same conditions from November 1, 2018, to April 30, 2019 (period 2), in our study. All respiratory samples from these patients were screened for six respiratory viruses (respiratory syncytial virus [RSV], adenovirus [ADV], influenza A virus [Flu A], influenza B virus [Flu B], parainfluenza virus type 1 [PIV1], and parainfluenza virus type 3 [PIV3]) using a multiplex real-time PCR assay. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The median ages of the enrolled patients at the time of diagnosis were 1.5 years and 1.0 years for period 1 and period 2, respectively. In period 1, viral pathogens were detected in 50.3% (776/1543) of the enrolled patients. The most frequently identified viral pathogen was RSV (35.9%, 554/1543), followed by PIV3 (9.6%, 148/1543), PIV1 (3.6%, 56/1543), ADV (3.4%, 52/1543), Flu A (1.0%, 16/1543), and Flu B (0.8%, 13/1543). The total detection rates of these six viruses in the peak season of CAP were at the pre-COVID level. The prevalence of Flu A decreased dramatically, and circulation activity was low compared to pre-COVID levels, while the incidence of PIV3 increased significantly. There were no significant differences in the detection rates of RSV, ADV, Flu B, and PIV1 between the two periods. Our results showed that respiratory viruses accounted for CAP in hospitalized children at pre-COVID levels as communities and schools reopened within the zero-COVID policy, although the prevalence aetiology spectrum varied.

Guidelines for the prevention and management of children and adolescents with COVID-19.

Children are the future of the world, but their health and future are facing great uncertainty because of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In order to improve the management of children with COVID-19, an international, multidisciplinary panel of experts developed a rapid advice guideline at the beginning of the outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020. After publishing the first version of the rapid advice guideline, the panel has updated the guideline by including additional stakeholders in the panel and a comprehensive search of the latest evidence. All recommendations were supported by systematic reviews and graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Expert judgment was used to develop good practice statements supplementary to the graded evidence-based recommendations. The updated guideline comprises nine recommendations and one good practice statement. It focuses on the key recommendations pertinent to the following issues: identification of prognostic factors for death or pediatric intensive care unit admission; the use of remdesivir, systemic glucocorticoids and antipyretics, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, and high-flow oxygen by nasal cannula or non-invasive ventilation for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure; breastfeeding; vaccination; and the management of pediatric mental health. CONCLUSION: This updated evidence-based guideline intends to provide clinicians, pediatricians, patients and other stakeholders with evidence-based recommendations for the prevention and management of COVID-19 in children and adolescents. Larger studies with longer follow-up to determine the effectiveness and safety of systemic glucocorticoids, IVIG, noninvasive ventilation, and the vaccines for COVID-19 in children and adolescents are encouraged. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Several clinical practice guidelines for children with COVID-19 have been developed, but only few of them have been recently updated. • We developed an evidence-based guideline at the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak and have now updated it based on the results of a comprehensive search of the latest evidence. WHAT IS NEW: • The updated guideline provides key recommendations pertinent to the following issues: identification of prognostic factors for death or pediatric intensive care unit admission; the use of remdesivir, systemic glucocorticoids and antipyretics, intravenous immunoglobulin for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, and high-flow oxygen by nasal cannula or non-invasive ventilation for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure; breastfeeding; vaccination; and the management of pediatric mental health.

Use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and adverse outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: There are concerns that the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may increase the risk of adverse outcomes among patients with coronavirus COVID-19. This study aimed to synthesize the evidence on associations between the use of NSAIDs and adverse outcomes. Methods: A systematic search of WHO COVID-19 Database, Medline, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, China Biology Medicine disc, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database for all articles published from January 1, 2020, to November 7, 2021, as well as a supplementary search of Google Scholar. We included all comparative studies that enrolled patients who took NSAIDs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data extraction and quality assessment of methodology of included studies were completed by two reviewers independently. We conducted a meta-analysis on the main adverse outcomes, as well as selected subgroup analyses stratified by the type of NSAID and population (both positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or not). Findings: Forty comparative studies evaluating 4,867,795 adult cases were identified. Twenty-eight (70%) of the included studies enrolled patients positive to SARS-CoV-2 tests. The use of NSAIDs did not reduce mortality outcomes among people with COVID-19 (number of studies [N] = 29, odds ratio [OR] = 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75 to 1.14, I2  = 89%). Results suggested that the use of NSAIDs was not significantly associated with higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with or without COVID-19 (N = 10, OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.07, I2  = 78%; N = 8, aOR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.09, I2  = 26%), or an increased probability of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (N = 12, OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.75, I2  = 82% ; N = 4, aOR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.22, I2  = 60%), requiring mechanical ventilation (N = 11, OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.54, I2  = 63%; N = 5, aOR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.24, I2  = 66%), or administration of supplemental oxygen (N = 5, OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.24, I2  = 63%; N = 2, aOR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.12, I2  = 0%). The subgroup analysis revealed that, compared with patients not using any NSAIDs, the use of ibuprofen (N = 5, OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.50 to 2.39; N = 4, aOR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.16) and COX-2 inhibitor (N = 4, OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.35 to 1.11; N = 2, aOR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.18) were not associated with an increased risk of death. Interpretation: Data suggests that NSAIDs such as ibuprofen, aspirin and COX-2 inhibitor, can be used safely among patients positive to SARS-CoV-2. However, for some of the analyses the number of studies were limited and the quality of evidence was overall low, therefore more research is needed to corroborate these findings. Funding: There was no funding source for this study.

Potentially effective drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 or MIS-C in children: a systematic review.

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of using potential drugs: remdesivir and glucocorticoid in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19 and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in treating MIS-C. We searched seven databases, three preprint platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google from December 1, 2019, to August 5, 2021, to collect evidence of remdesivir, glucocorticoid, and IVIG which were used in children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C. A total of nine cohort studies and one case series study were included in this systematic review. In terms of remdesivir, the meta-analysis of single-arm cohort studies have shown that after the treatment, 54.7% (95%CI, 10.3 to 99.1%) experienced adverse events, 5.6% (95%CI, 1.2 to 10.1%) died, and 27.0% (95%CI, 0 to 73.0%) needed extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or invasive mechanical ventilation. As for glucocorticoids, the results of the meta-analysis showed that the fixed-effect summary odds ratio for the association with mortality was 2.79 (95%CI, 0.13 to 60.87), and the mechanical ventilation rate was 3.12 (95%CI, 0.80 to 12.08) for glucocorticoids compared with the control group. In terms of IVIG, most of the included cohort studies showed that for MIS-C patients with more severe clinical symptoms, IVIG combined with methylprednisolone could achieve better clinical efficacy than IVIG alone. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the current evidence in the included studies is insignificant and of low quality. It is recommended to conduct high-quality randomized controlled trials of remdesivir, glucocorticoids, and IVIG in children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C to provide substantial evidence for the development of guidelines. WHAT IS KNOWN: • The efficacy and safety of using potential drugs such as remdesivir, glucocorticoid, and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19/MIS-C are unclear. WHAT IS NEW: • Overall, the current evidence cannot adequately demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of using remdesivir, glucocorticoids, and IVIG in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C. • We are calling for the publication of high-quality clinical trials and provide substantial evidence for the development of guidelines.

The Impact of Weather and Air Pollution on Viral Infection and Disease Outcome Among Pediatric Pneumonia Patients in Chongqing, China, from 2009 to 2018: A Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: For pediatric pneumonia, the meteorological and air pollution indicators have been frequently investigated for their association with viral circulation but not for their impact on disease severity. METHODS: We performed a 10-year prospective, observational study in 1 hospital in Chongqing, China, to recruit children with pneumonia. Eight commonly seen respiratory viruses were tested. Autoregressive distributed lag (ADL) and random forest (RF) models were used to fit monthly detection rates of each virus at the population level and to predict the possibility of severe pneumonia at the individual level, respectively. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2018, 6611 pediatric pneumonia patients were included, and 4846 (73.3%) tested positive for at least 1 respiratory virus. The patient median age was 9 months (interquartile range, 4‒20). ADL models demonstrated a decent fitting of detection rates of R2 > 0.7 for respiratory syncytial virus, human rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, and human metapneumovirus. Based on the RF models, the area under the curve for host-related factors alone was 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI], .87‒.89) and 0.86 (95% CI, .85‒.88) for meteorological and air pollution indicators alone and 0.62 (95% CI, .60‒.63) for viral infections alone. The final model indicated that 9 weather and air pollution indicators were important determinants of severe pneumonia, with a relative contribution of 62.53%, which is significantly higher than respiratory viral infections (7.36%). CONCLUSIONS: Meteorological and air pollution predictors contributed more to severe pneumonia in children than did respiratory viruses. These meteorological data could help predict times when children would be at increased risk for severe pneumonia and when interventions, such as reducing outdoor activities, may be warranted.

Risk factors for poor prognosis in children and adolescents with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study provides the first systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the predictors of unfavorable prognosis of COVID-19 in children and adolescents. METHODS: We searched literature databases until July 2021 for studies that investigated risk factors for unfavorable prognosis of children and adolescents with COVID-19. We used random-effects models to estimate the effect size with 95% confidence interval (CI). FINDINGS: We identified 56 studies comprising 79,104 individuals. Mortality was higher in patients with multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) (odds ratio [OR]=58.00, 95% CI 6.39-526.79) and who were admitted to intensive care (OR=12.64, 95% CI 3.42-46.68). Acute respiratry distress syndrme (ARDS) (OR=29.54, 95% CI 12.69-68.78) and acute kidney injury (AKI) (OR=55.02, 95% CI 6.26-483.35) increased the odds to be admitted to intensive care; shortness of breath (OR=16.96, 95% CI 7.66-37.51) increased the need of respiratory support; and neurological diseases (OR=5.16, 95% CI 2.30-11.60), C-reactive protein (CRP) level ≥80 mg/L (OR=11.70, 95% CI 4.37-31.37) and D-dimer level ≥0.5ug/mL (OR=20.40, 95% CI 1.76-236.44) increased the odds of progression to severe or critical disease. INTERPRETATION: Congenital heart disease, chronic pulmonary disease, neurological diseases, obesity, MIS-C, shortness of breath, ARDS, AKI, gastrointestinal symptoms, elevated CRP and D-dimer are associated with unfavourable prognosis in children and adolescents with COVID-19.

Quality and consistency of clinical practice guidelines for treating children with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic negatively affects children's health. Many guidelines have been developed for treating children with COVID-19. The quality of the existing guidelines and the consistency of recommendations remains unknown. Therefore, we aim to review the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for children with COVID-19 systematically. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, Embase, guideline-related websites, and Google. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool and Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) checklist were used to evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of the included guidelines, respectively. The consistency of recommendations across the guidelines and their supporting evidence were analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty guidelines were included in this study. The mean AGREE II score and mean RIGHT reporting rate of the included guidelines were 37% (range, 22-62%) and 52% (range, 31-89%), respectively. As for methodological quality, no guideline was classified as high, one guideline (5%) moderate, and 19 (95%) low. In terms of reporting quality, one guideline (5%) was rated as high, 12 guidelines (60%) moderate, and seven (35%) low. Among included guidelines, recommendations varied greatly in the use of remdesivir (recommend: 25%, not recommend: 45%, not report: 30%), interferon (recommend: 15%, not recommend: 50%, not report: 35%), glucocorticoids (recommend: 50%, not recommend: 20%, not report: 30%), and intravenous immune globulin (recommend: 35%, not recommend: 30%, not report: 35%). None of the guidelines cited clinical trials from children with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: The methodological and reporting quality of guidelines for treating children with COVID-19 was not high. Recommendations were inconsistent across different guidelines. The supporting evidence from children with COVID-19 was very limited.

Guidelines for the Management of Children and Adolescent with COVID-19: protocol for an update.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a constant threat to people's lives, bringing huge challenges to the global public health and medical service system. In order to ensure the timeliness and reliability of the recommendations in guidelines, the working group of the Rapid Advice Guidelines for Management of Children with COVID-19 decided to update the guideline to incorporate the latest evidence to guide the management of COVID-19 in children and adolescent. METHODS: We will update the guidelines, originally developed as a rapid advice guideline, into a standard guideline. We will follow the clinical practice guideline (CPG) update manuals of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the Spanish National Health System (SNHS). The updated guidelines will also follow the RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) checklist and Checklist for the Reporting of Updated Guidelines (CheckUp). DISCUSSION: Through systematic search, evaluation and grading of the best available relevant clinical evidence, combined with the experience of frontline clinical experts in the fight against the epidemic and the wishes of patients and their caretakers, we will update our previous rapid advice guidelines into a high-quality, implementable standard guidelines for the management of COVID-19 in children and adolescent. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The standard guideline update has been registered at the International Practice Guidelines Registry Platform (http://guidelines-registry.cn/?lang=en, registration No. IPGRP-2020CN101).

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: a systematic review of published case studies.

BACKGROUND: Many cases have been reported recently on multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a newly emerged disease that seemed to correlate with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this review was to describe the clinical features, treatment and outcomes of MIS-C, as well as to assess the risk of bias of published case studies, analyzing their reporting quality. METHODS: We searched all articles reporting on multisystem inflammatory condition in children and adolescents in the context of COVID-19 through MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, China Biology Medicine disc (CBM) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) from their inception to June 17, 2020. We used CARE and IHE checklists to evaluate the risk of bias and quality of the included studies. We combined the data of clinical manifestations, imaging findings, treatments and outcomes using STATA version 15. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included, with a total of 270 participants. Most cases were from Europe and the United States, and the terms of MIS-C in different articles were varied. Fever and gastrointestinal symptoms were the most experienced symptoms. Shock, rash, conjunctivitis, lips or oral cavity changes, hand and feet anomalies, and lymphadenopathy were observed, while respiratory symptoms seemed relatively infrequent. Seventy-eight percent to 100% of patients had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 by serology [86% (95% CI: 78%, 95%)] were more than those by RT-PCR [36% (95% CI: 26%, 46%)]. Most patients had one or more increased inflammatory markers including C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), ferritin, interleukin-6 (IL-6), and D-dimer, accompanied by neutrophilia and lymphopenia. Impaired cardiac function was seen from elevated biomarkers and abnormal echocardiography. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), anticoagulants, inotropic agents and glucocorticoids were the main treatments, along with other intensive supportive care. Overall, the outcomes of MIS-C were favorable, and only one death was recorded. In terms of the quality assessment of included studies, most of the case studies did not follow the standard reporting checklist, so that they failed to get higher scores in the risk of bias assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MIS-C present with symptoms more severe than children with COVID-19, with fever and gastrointestinal symptoms as the primary manifestations and multisystem involvement, particularly cardiovascular system. Longer follow-up and further researches for the pathophysiology of MIS-C are urgently needed. In addition, attention should be paid to the quality of case studies to improve the completeness and transparency of scientific reports.

Follow-up Study of Long-time Positive RT-PCR in Stool Specimens From Asymptomatic Children Infected With SARS-CoV-2.

In the current study, we report on 4 children with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, of which 3 of them were asymptomatic. These patients had both pharyngeal swabs and anal swabs testing during hospital or after discharge. All the 4 children showed long-time positive viral RNA in the stool specimens after pharyngeal swabs turned negative during the follow-up stage, especially in the asymptomatic children. The positive RNA in stool specimens of asymptomatic children last for more than 54 days after admission or 30 days after discharge.

How should our testing behaviour change with time in children in current COVID-19 pandemic?

BACKGROUNDS: More paediatric-confirmed cases have been reported with the global pandemic of COVID-19. This study aims to summarize the key points and supply suggestions on screening paediatric COVID-19 patients more appropriately. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively included paediatric patients who have accepted SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing in Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University (30 January 2020 to 13 February 2020) and compared them with paediatric-confirmed COVID-19 cases. Besides, a review was carried out by analysing all current literature about laboratory-confirmed paediatric cases with COVID-19. RESULTS: There were 46 suspected cases included in the descriptive study. The results of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing were all negative. Compared with paediatric-confirmed cases, the incidence of epidemic history was lower in suspected cases (P < .001). The rate of fever (P < .001), cough (P < .001), headache or dizziness (P < .001), vomiting (P < .001) and abdominal discomfort or distention (P = .01) were more observed in the included suspected children. There were more children having decreased WBC count in the confirmed group. In the literature review, twenty-nine studies were obtained with 488 paediatric COVID-19 cases. 88.6% of them had epidemiological history. Cough and fever were the most common symptoms. Compared with older patients, the incidence of fever, respiratory symptoms, lethargy and headache or dizziness was lower, while gastrointestinal symptoms were reported more. CONCLUSIONS: Children with a history of close contact with confirmed cases, manifested as cough and fever should be paid more attention to after excluding infection of other common pathogens. Atypical symptoms should not be over-emphasized in screening paediatric COVID-19. More studies are needed for guiding efficient recognition in paediatric COVID-19.

Erratum to rapid advice guidelines for management of children with COVID-19.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-3754.].

Supportive care for patient with respiratory diseases: an umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: Supportive treatment is an important and effective part of the management for patients with life-threatening diseases. This study aims to identify and evaluate the forms of supportive care for patients with respiratory diseases. METHODS: An umbrella review of supportive care for patient with respiratory diseases was undertaken. We comprehensively searched the following databases: Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), Wanfang Data and CBM (SinoMed) from their inception to 31 March 2020, and other sources to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses related to supportive treatments for patient with respiratory diseases including Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and influenza. We assessed the methodological quality using the AMSTAR score and the quality of the evidence for the primary outcomes of each included systematic review and meta-analysis. RESULTS: We included 18 systematic reviews and meta-analyses in this study. Most studies focused on the respiratory and circulatory support. Ten studies were of high methodological quality, five studies of medium quality, and three studies of low quality. According to four studies extracorporeal membrane oxygenation did not reduce mortality in adults [odds ratio/relative risk (OR/RR) ranging from 0.71 to 1.28], but two studies reported significantly lower mortality in patients receiving venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation than in the control group (OR/RR ranging from 0.38 to 0.73). Besides, monitoring of vital signs and increasing the number of medical staff may also reduce the mortality in patients with respiratory diseases. CONCLUSIONS: Our overview suggests that supportive care may reduce the mortality of patients with respiratory diseases to some extent. However, the quality of evidence for the primary outcomes in the included studies was low to moderate. Further systematic reviews and meta-analyses are needed to address the evidence gap regarding the supportive care for SARS, MERS and COVID-19.

Effectiveness and safety of glucocorticoids to treat COVID-19: a rapid review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Glucocorticoids are widely used in the treatment of various pulmonary inflammatory diseases, but they are also often accompanied by significant adverse reactions. Published guidelines point out that low dose and short duration systemic glucocorticoid therapy may be considered for patients with rapidly progressing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) while the evidence is still limited. METHODS: We comprehensively searched electronic databases and supplemented the screening by conducting a manual search. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies evaluating the effectiveness and safety of glucocorticoids in children and adults with COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and conducted meta-analyses of the main indicators that were identified in the studies. RESULTS: Our search retrieved 23 studies, including one RCT and 22 cohort studies, with a total of 13,815 patients. In adults with COVID-19, the use of systemic glucocorticoid did not reduce mortality [risk ratio (RR) =2.00, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.69 to 5.75, I2=90.9%] or the duration of lung inflammation [weighted mean difference (WMD) =-1 days, 95% CI: -2.91 to 0.91], while a significant reduction was found in the duration of fever (WMD =-3.23 days, 95% CI: -3.56 to -2.90). In patients with SARS, glucocorticoids also did not reduce the mortality (RR =1.52, 95% CI: 0.89 to 2.60, I2=84.6%), duration of fever (WMD =0.82 days, 95% CI: -2.88 to 4.52, I2=97.9%) or duration of lung inflammation absorption (WMD =0.95 days, 95% CI: -7.57 to 9.48, I2=94.6%). The use of systemic glucocorticoid therapy prolonged the duration of hospital stay in all patients (COVID-19, SARS and MERS). CONCLUSIONS: Glucocorticoid therapy was found to reduce the duration of fever, but not mortality, duration of hospitalization or lung inflammation absorption. Long-term use of high-dose glucocorticoids increased the risk of adverse reactions such as coinfections, so routine use of systemic glucocorticoids for patients with COVID-19 cannot be recommend.

Chest computed tomography for the diagnosis of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a rapid review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a massive impact on the whole world. Computed tomography (CT) has been widely used in the diagnosis of this novel pneumonia. This study aims to understand the role of CT for the diagnosis and the main imaging manifestations of patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a rapid review and meta-analysis on studies about the use of chest CT for the diagnosis of COVID-19. We comprehensively searched databases and preprint servers on chest CT for patients with COVID-19 between 1 January 2020 and 31 March 2020. The primary outcome was the sensitivity of chest CT imaging. We also conducted subgroup analyses and evaluated the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: A total of 103 studies with 5,673 patients were included. Using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results as reference, a meta-analysis based on 64 studies estimated the sensitivity of chest CT imaging in COVID-19 was 99% (95% CI, 0.97-1.00). If case reports were excluded, the sensitivity in case series was 96% (95% CI, 0.93-0.99). The sensitivity of CT scan in confirmed patients under 18 years old was only 66% (95% CI, 0.15-1.00). The most common imaging manifestation was ground-glass opacities (GGO) which was found in 75% (95% CI, 0.68-0.82) of the patients. The pooled probability of bilateral involvement was 84% (95% CI, 0.81-0.88). The most commonly involved lobes were the right lower lobe (84%, 95% CI, 0.78-0.90) and left lower lobe (81%, 95% CI, 0.74-0.87). The quality of evidence was low across all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this meta-analysis indicated that chest CT scan had a high sensitivity in diagnosis of patients with COVID-19. Therefore, CT can potentially be used to assist in the diagnosis of COVID-19.

Potential effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents in children with coronavirus disease 2019: a rapid review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 outbreak presents a new, life-threatening disease. Our aim was to assess the potential effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents for COVID-19 in children. METHODS: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane library, CBM, CNKI, and Wanfang Data) from their inception to March 31, 2020 were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), clinical controlled trials and cohort studies of interventions with antiviral agents for children (less than 18 years of age) with COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies with 6,008 patients were included. There was no direct evidence and all of evidence were indirect. The risks of bias in all studies were moderate to high in general. The effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents for children with COVID-19 is uncertain: For adults with COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir had no effect on mortality [risk ratio (RR) =0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45 to 1.30]. Arbidol and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) had no benefit on probability of negative PCR test (RR =1.27; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.73; RR =0.93; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.18) respectively. For adults with SARS, interferon was associated with reduced corticosteroid dose [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.14 g; 95% CI, -0.21 to -0.07] but had no effect on mortality (RR =0.72; 95% CI, 0.28 to 1.88); ribavirin did not reduce mortality (RR =0.68; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.06) and was associated with high risk of severe adverse reactions; and oseltamivir had no effect on mortality (RR =0.87; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.38). Ribavirin combined with interferon was also not effective in adults with MERS and associated with adverse reactions. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence showing the effectiveness of antiviral agents for children with COVID-19, and the clinical efficacy of existing antiviral agents is still uncertain. We do not suggest clinical routine use of antivirals for COVID-19 in children, with the exception of clinical trials.

A follow-up study of children infected with SARS-CoV-2 from western China.

BACKGROUND: To clarify the characteristic and the duration of positive nucleic acid in children infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), including asymptomatic children. METHODS: A total of 32 children confirmed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between January 24 and February 12, 2020 from four provinces in western China were enrolled in this study and followed up until discharge and quarantine 14 days later. RESULTS: Eleven children (34%) were asymptomatic, among whom six children had normal computed tomographic (CT) scan images. Age and gender were not associated with clinical symptoms or the results of CT scan in children infected with SARS-CoV-2. The concentrations of white blood cells and neutrophils were higher in children with asymptomatic infection than in children with clinical symptoms or CT abnormalities. Patients who presented with CT abnormalities had lower D-dimer or lower total bilirubin than those who had normal CT scan but clinical symptoms. All children recovered and no one died or was admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). The mean duration of positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid was 15.4 (SD =7.2) days and similar for both asymptomatic children and children with symptoms or CT abnormalities. We found a significant negative correlation between the lymphocyte count and the duration of positive nucleic acid test. CONCLUSIONS: Children with asymptomatic infection should be quarantined for the same duration as symptomatic patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. The clinical significance and mechanism behind the negative correlation between the number of lymphocytes and the duration of positive SARS-CoV-2 needs further study.

Breastfeeding of infants born to mothers with COVID-19: a rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Existing recommendations on whether mothers with COVID-19 should continue breastfeeding are still conflicting. We aimed to conduct a rapid review of mother-to-child transmission of COVID-19 during breastfeeding. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China Biology Medicine disc, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and preprint articles up to March 2020. We included studies relevant to transmission through milk and respiratory droplets during breastfeeding of mothers with COVID-19, SARS, MERS and influenza. Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 4,481 records were identified in our literature search. Six studies (five case reports and one case series) involving 58 mothers (16 mothers with COVID-19, 42 mothers with influenza) and their infants proved eligible. Five case reports showed that the viral nucleic acid tests for all thirteen collected samples of breast milk from mothers with COVID-19 were negative. A case series of 42 influenza infected postpartum mothers taking precautions (hand hygiene and wearing masks) before breastfeeding showed that no neonates were infected with influenza during one-month of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence indicates that SARS-CoV-2 viral nucleic acid has not been detected in breast milk. The benefits of breastfeeding may outweigh the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in infants. Mothers with COVID-19 should take appropriate precautions to reduce the risk of transmission via droplets and close contact during breastfeeding.

Effectiveness of intravenous immunoglobulin for children with severe COVID-19: a rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is usually used as supportive therapy, but the treatment of COVID-19 by IVIG is controversial. This rapid review aims to explore the clinical effectiveness and safety of IVIG in the treatment of children with severe COVID-19. METHODS: We systematically searched the literature on the use of IVIG in patients with COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), including both adults and children. We assessed the risk of bias and quality of evidence and reported the main findings descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 1,519 articles were identified by initial literature search, and finally six studies met our inclusion criteria, included one randomized controlled trial (RCT), four case series and one case report involving 198 patients. One case series showed the survival of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was not improved by IVIG. One case report showed high-dose IVIG could improve the outcome of COVID-19 adults. Three observational studies showed inconsistent results of the effect of IVIG on SARS patients. One RCT showed that IVIG did not reduce mortality or the incidence of nosocomial infection in adults with severe SARS. The quality of evidence was between low and very low. CONCLUSIONS: The existing evidence is insufficient to support the efficacy or safety of IVIG in the treatment of COVID-19.