Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
BMJ ; 370: m2980, 2020 07 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-691120


OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: WHO covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature, up to 1 March 2021 and six additional Chinese databases up to 20 February 2021. Studies identified as of 12 February 2021 were included in the analysis. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised clinical trials in which people with suspected, probable, or confirmed covid-19 were randomised to drug treatment or to standard care or placebo. Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. METHODS: After duplicate data abstraction, a bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. For each outcome, interventions were classified in groups from the most to the least beneficial or harmful following GRADE guidance. RESULTS: 196 trials enrolling 76 767 patients were included; 111 (56.6%) trials and 35 098 (45.72%) patients are new from the previous iteration; 113 (57.7%) trials evaluating treatments with at least 100 patients or 20 events met the threshold for inclusion in the analyses. Compared with standard care, corticosteroids probably reduce death (risk difference 20 fewer per 1000 patients, 95% credible interval 36 fewer to 3 fewer, moderate certainty), mechanical ventilation (25 fewer per 1000, 44 fewer to 1 fewer, moderate certainty), and increase the number of days free from mechanical ventilation (2.6 more, 0.3 more to 5.0 more, moderate certainty). Interleukin-6 inhibitors probably reduce mechanical ventilation (30 fewer per 1000, 46 fewer to 10 fewer, moderate certainty) and may reduce length of hospital stay (4.3 days fewer, 8.1 fewer to 0.5 fewer, low certainty), but whether or not they reduce mortality is uncertain (15 fewer per 1000, 30 fewer to 6 more, low certainty). Janus kinase inhibitors may reduce mortality (50 fewer per 1000, 84 fewer to no difference, low certainty), mechanical ventilation (46 fewer per 1000, 74 fewer to 5 fewer, low certainty), and duration of mechanical ventilation (3.8 days fewer, 7.5 fewer to 0.1 fewer, moderate certainty). The impact of remdesivir on mortality and most other outcomes is uncertain. The effects of ivermectin were rated as very low certainty for all critical outcomes, including mortality. In patients with non-severe disease, colchicine may reduce mortality (78 fewer per 1000, 110 fewer to 9 fewer, low certainty) and mechanical ventilation (57 fewer per 1000, 90 fewer to 3 more, low certainty). Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to reduce risk of death or have an effect on any other patient-important outcome. The certainty in effects for all other interventions was low or very low. CONCLUSION: Corticosteroids and interleukin-6 inhibitors probably confer important benefits in patients with severe covid-19. Janus kinase inhibitors appear to have promising benefits, but certainty is low. Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to have any important benefits. Whether or not remdesivir, ivermectin, and other drugs confer any patient-important benefit remains uncertain. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review was not registered. The protocol is publicly available in the supplementary material. READERS' NOTE: This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This is the fourth version of the original article published on 30 July 2020 (BMJ 2020;370:m2980), and previous versions can be found as data supplements. When citing this paper please consider adding the version number and date of access for clarity.

Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S./statistics & numerical data , China/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Databases, Factual/statistics & numerical data , Drug Combinations , Evidence-Based Medicine/methods , Evidence-Based Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Network Meta-Analysis , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Standard of Care , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology
Zhongguo Zhong Yao Za Zhi ; 45(10): 2265-2274, 2020 May.
Article in Chinese | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-398790


In December 2019, an outbreak of viral pneumonia began in Wuhan, Hubei Province, which caused the spread of infectious pneumonia to a certain extent in China and neighboring countries and regions, and triggered the epidemic crisis. The coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) is an acute respiratory infectious disease listed as a B infectious disease, which is managed according to standards for A infectious disease. Traditional Chinese medicine and integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine have played an active role in the prevention and control of this epidemic. China's ethnomedicine has recognized infectious diseases since ancient times, and formed a medical system including theory, therapies, formula and herbal medicines for such diseases. Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 epidemic, Tibet Autonomous Region, Qinghai Province, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region and Chuxiong Autonomous Prefecture of Yunnan, Qiandongnan Autonomous Prefecture of Guizhou have issued the prevention and control programs for COVID-19 using Tibetan, Mongolian, Uygur, Yi and Miao medicines. These programs reflect the wisdom of ethnomedicine in preventing and treating diseases, which have successfully extracted prescriptions and preventive measures for the outbreak of the epidemic from their own medical theories and traditional experiences. In this paper, we summarized and explained the prescriptions and medicinal materials of ethnomedicine in these programs, and the origin of Tibetan medicine prescriptions and Mongolian medicine prescriptions in ancient books were studied. These become the common characteristics of medical prevention and treatment programs for ethnomedicine to formulate therapeutic programs under the guidance of traditional medicine theories, recommend prescriptions and prevention and treatment methods with characteristics of ethnomedicine, and focus on the conve-nience and standardization. However, strengthening the support of science and technology and the popularization to the public, and improving the participation of ethnomedicine in national public health services and the capacity-building to deal with sudden and critical diseases are key contents in the development of ethnomedicine in the future.

Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , COVID-19 , China , Humans , Medicine, Traditional , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Tibet