Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
J Clin Apher ; 36(3): 470-482, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1064370

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine clinical outcomes associated with convalescent plasma therapy in COVID-19 patients. We performed a literature search on PubMed, medRxiv, Web of Science, and Scopus to identify studies published up to December 10th, 2020 that examined the efficacy of convalescent plasma treatment for COVID-19. The primary endpoints were mortality, clinical improvement, and hospital length of stay. We screened 859 studies that met the search criteria, performed full-text reviews of 56 articles, and identified 15 articles that fulfilled inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. The odds of mortality were significantly lower in the convalescent plasma group compared to the control group (OR = 0.59 [95% CI = 0.44; 0.78], P < .001), although results from two key randomized controlled trials did not support the mortality benefit. The odds of clinical improvement were significantly higher in the convalescent plasma group compared to the control group (OR = 2.02 [95% CI = 1.54; 2.65], P < .001). There was no difference in hospital length of stay between the convalescent plasma group and the control group (MD = -0.49 days [95% CI = -3.11; 2.12], P = .713). In all, these data indicate that a mortality benefit with convalescent plasma is unclear, although there remain benefits with convalescent plasma therapy for COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/mortality , Humans , Immunization, Passive/methods , Length of Stay , Plasma , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Risk , Treatment Outcome
2.
Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther ; 19(6): 679-687, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-927085

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To systematically review the clinical literature reporting the use of Lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) for the treatment of patients with Cornonavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) to assess the efficacy of LPV/r for the treatment of COVID-19.Methods: The authors systematically searched PubMed and MedRxiv databases for studies describing treatment of COVID-19 patients using LPV/r compared to other therapies. Articles were excluded if they were case reports, opinion editorials, preclinical studies, single-armed studies, not written in English, not relevant to the topic, or published before May 2020. The included outcomes were viral clearance as measured by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) negativity and/or improvement on chest computed tomography (CT), mortality, and adverse events.Results: Among 858 total studies, 16 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative review. These studies consisted of 3 randomized control trials, 3 open-label trials, and 10 observational studies. Most of these studies did not report positive clinical outcomes with LPV/r treatment.Conclusion: The systematic review revealed insufficient evidence of effectiveness and clinical benefit of LPV/r in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Specifically, LPV/r does not appear to improve clinical outcome, mortality, time to RT-PCR negativity, or chest CT clearance in patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Drug Combinations , Humans , Lopinavir/administration & dosage , Lopinavir/adverse effects , Ritonavir/administration & dosage , Ritonavir/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...