ABSTRACT
Objectives: The widespread intestinal carriage of ESBL-producing Escherichia coli (ESBL E. coli) among both patients and healthy individuals is alarming. However, the global prevalence and trend of this MDR bacterium in healthcare settings remains undetermined. To address this knowledge gap, we performed a comparative meta-analysis of the prevalence in community and healthcare settings. Methods: Our systematic review included 133 articles published between 1 January 2000 and 22 April 2021 and indexed in PubMed, EMBASE or Google Scholar. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to obtain the global pooled prevalence (community and healthcare settings). Subgroup meta-analyses were performed by grouping studies using the WHO regions and 5â year intervals of the study period. Results: We found that 21.1% (95% CI, 19.1%-23.2%) of inpatients in healthcare settings and 17.6% (95% CI, 15.3%-19.8%) of healthy individuals worldwide carried ESBL E. coli in their intestine. The global carriage rate in healthcare settings increased 3-fold from 7% (95% CI, 3.7%-10.3%) in 2001-05 to 25.7% (95% CI, 19.5%-32.0%) in 2016-20, whereas in community settings it increased 10-fold from 2.6% (95% CI, 1.2%-4.0%) to 26.4% (95% CI, 17.0%-35.9%) over the same period. Conclusions: The global and regional human intestinal ESBL E. coli carriage is increasing in both community and healthcare settings. Carriage rates were generally higher in healthcare than in community settings. Key relevant health organizations should perform surveillance and implement preventive measures to address the spread of ESBL E. coli in both settings.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Reports on the effects of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors on the clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) have been conflicting. We performed this meta-analysis to find conclusive evidence. METHODS: We searched published articles through PubMed, EMBASE and medRxiv from 5 January 2020 to 3 August 2020. Studies that reported clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19, stratified by the class of antihypertensives, were included. Random and fixed-effects models were used to estimate pooled odds ratio (OR). RESULTS: A total 36 studies involving 30,795 patients with COVID-19 were included. The overall risk of poor patient outcomes (severe COVID-19 or death) was lower in patients taking RAAS inhibitors (OR = 0.79, 95% CI: [0.67, 0.95]) compared with those receiving non-RAAS inhibitor antihypertensives. However, further sub-meta-analysis showed that specific RAAS inhibitors did not show a reduction of poor COVID-19 outcomes when compared with any class of antihypertensive except beta-blockers (BBs). For example, compared to calcium channel blockers (CCBs), neither angiotensin-I-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) (OR = 0.91, 95% CI: [0.67, 1.23]) nor angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs) (OR = 0.90, 95% CI: [0.62, 1.33]) showed a reduction of poor COVID-19 outcomes. When compared with BBs, however, both ACEIs (OR = 0.85, 95% CI: [0.73, 0.99) and ARBs (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: [0.55, 0.94]) showed an apparent decrease in poor COVID-19 outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: RAAS inhibitors did not increase the risk of mortality or severity of COVID-19. Differences in COVID-19 clinical outcomes between different class of antihypertensive drugs were likely due to the underlying comorbidities for which the antihypertensive drugs were prescribed, although adverse effects of drugs such as BBs could not be excluded.
