Single-center experience of organ transplant practice during the COVID-19 epidemic.

In order to safely carry out organ donation transplants during the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), we have formulated strict procedures in place for organ donation and transplantation. We retrospectively analyzed our transplantation work from January 20 to May 5, 2020, to discuss whether organ transplantation can be carried out safely during the epidemic period. From January 20 to May 5, 43 cases of donation were carried out in our hospital, and the utilization rate of liver, kidney, heart, lung, and pancreas donations was more than 90%. Forty-one cases of liver transplantation and 84 cases of kidney transplantation were performed. No graft loss or recipient death occurred within one month after kidney transplantation, and one patient (2.4%) died after liver transplantation. There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay compared with that during the same period in the previous three years. More importantly, COVID-19 infection did not occur among healthcare providers, donors, patients, or their accompanying families in our center. Under the premise of correct protection, it is safe and feasible to carry out organ transplantation during the epidemic period. Our experience during the outbreak might provide a clinical reference for countries facing COVID-19 worldwide.

COVID-19-related medical research: a meta-research and critical appraisal.

BACKGROUND: Since the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, a large number of COVID-19-related papers have been published. However, concerns about the risk of expedited science have been raised. We aimed at reviewing and categorizing COVID-19-related medical research and to critically appraise peer-reviewed original articles. METHODS: The data sources were Pubmed, Cochrane COVID-19 register study, arXiv, medRxiv and bioRxiv, from 01/11/2019 to 01/05/2020. Peer-reviewed and preprints publications related to COVID-19 were included, written in English or Chinese. No limitations were placed on study design. Reviewers screened and categorized studies according to i) publication type, ii) country of publication, and iii) topics covered. Original articles were critically appraised using validated quality assessment tools. RESULTS: Among the 11,452 publications identified, 10,516 met the inclusion criteria, among which 7468 (71.0%) were peer-reviewed articles. Among these, 4190 publications (56.1%) did not include any data or analytics (comprising expert opinion pieces). Overall, the most represented topics were infectious disease (n = 2326, 22.1%), epidemiology (n = 1802, 17.1%), and global health (n = 1602, 15.2%). The top five publishing countries were China (25.8%), United States (22.3%), United Kingdom (8.8%), Italy (8.1%) and India (3.4%). The dynamic of publication showed that the exponential growth of COVID-19 peer-reviewed articles was mainly driven by publications without original data (mean 261.5 articles ± 51.1 per week) as compared with original articles (mean of 69.3 ± 22.3 articles per week). Original articles including patient data accounted for 713 (9.5%) of peer-reviewed studies. A total of 576 original articles (80.8%) showed intermediate to high risk of bias. Last, except for simulation studies that mainly used large-scale open data, the median number of patients enrolled was of 102 (IQR = 37-337). CONCLUSIONS: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority of research is composed by publications without original data. Peer-reviewed original articles with data showed a high risk of bias and included a limited number of patients. Together, these findings underscore the urgent need to strike a balance between the velocity and quality of research, and to cautiously consider medical information and clinical applicability in a pressing, pandemic context. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/5zjyx/.