Efficacy and safety of fenofibrate in combination with phototherapy for the treatment of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia: a systematic review and meta-analyses.

Phototherapy is the standard treatment for neonatal jaundice. We aimed to review the efficacy and safety of fenofibrate as an adjunct therapy. Twelve databases were searched and a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Mean change (MC), mean difference (MD), and risk ratios (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random effects model. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the evidence's certainty. Nine randomized trials were included. The MC of total serum bilirubin (mg/dL) was significant at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 h with respective MC (95% CI) values of -0.46 (-0.61, -0.310), -1.10 (-1.68, -0.52), -2.06 (-2.20, -1.91), -2.15 (-2.74, -1.56), and -1.13 (-1.71, -0.55). The FEN + PT group had a shorter duration of phototherapy (MD: -14.36 h; 95% CI: -23.67, -5.06) and a shorter hospital stay (MD: -1.40 days; 95% CI: -2.14, -0.66). There was no significant difference in the risk of complications (RR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.54, 1.46) or the need for exchange transfusion (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.12, 2.81). The certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcomes. In conclusion, fenofibrate might be a safe adjunct to neonatal phototherapy. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed for the confirmation of these results.

Factors associated with successful publication for systematic review protocol registration: an analysis of 397 registered protocols.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses are on top of the evidence-based medicine pyramid, yet many of them are not completed after they are begun. Many factors impacting the publication of meta-analysis works have been discussed, and their association with publication likelihood has been investigated. These factors include the type of systematic review, journal metrics, h-index of the corresponding author, country of the corresponding author, funding sources, and duration of publication. In our current review, we aim to investigate these various factors and their impact on the likelihood of publication. A comprehensive review of 397 registered protocols retrieved from five databases was performed to investigate the different factors that might affect the likelihood of publication. These factors include the type of systematic review, journal metrics, h-index of the corresponding author, country of the corresponding author, funding sources, and duration of publication. RESULTS: We found that corresponding authors in developed countries and English-speaking countries had higher likelihoods of publication: 206/320 (p = 0.018) and 158/236 (p = 0.006), respectively. Factors affecting publications are the countries of corresponding author (p = 0.033), whether they are from developed countries (OR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.2-3.1, p = 0.016), from English-speaking countries (OR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.2-2.7, p = 0.005), update status of the protocol (OR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.0-2.6, p = 0.033), and external funding (OR: 1.7, 95% CI: 1.1-2.7, p = 0.025). Multivariable regression retains three variables as significant predictors for the publication of a systematic review: whether it is the corresponding author from developed countries (p = 0.013), update status of the protocol (p = 0.014), and external funding (p = 0.047). CONCLUSION: Being on top of the evidence hierarchy, systematic review and meta-analysis are the keys to informed clinical decision-making. Updating protocol status and external funding are significant influences on their publications. More attentions should be paid to the methodological quality of this type of publication.

COVID-19 outbreak after 100 days without community transmission: Epidemiological analysis of factors associated with death.

Background: Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused millions of deaths and lifelong consequences since December 2019. We attempted to evaluate the incidence, distribution, and risk factors associated with death after applying the social distance strategy to the second wave of SARS-CoV-2 in the Danang outbreak in Vietnam. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the online the Danang Hospital reports, gathering the epidemiological history of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 patients. We then conducted a descriptive analysis of Fisher's Phi Coefficient and Cramer's, along with multiple logistic regression models to test the effects of symptomatology and control measures performed by Vietnamese government. The last report we examined on August 29, 2020. Results: A total of 389 SARS-CoV-2 confirmed cases were related to the Danang outbreak are included in our analysis with a mean age of 47.1 (SD = 18.4), involving 154 men and 235 women, with 34 cases of death and 355 were alive. The study showed significant results related to age, quarantine measures, previous negative SARS-CoV-2 test, and a range of symptoms, including shortness of breath and myalgia (p-value <0.05). Our multiple-variable analysis suggested the significant risk of death was related to age, severe symptomology, undetected SARS-CoV-2 test results, and prior quarantined SARS-CoV-2 history. Conclusions: Vietnamese authorities had implemented successful quarantine practices to control the SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks. However, this virus has shown dynamic spread beyond the ability of the country to control its transmission. Adequate screening, social distancing, and adequate care of elderly and healthcare workers can lower the risk of future outbreaks.

The efficacy and adverse effects of favipiravir on patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of published clinical trials and observational studies.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of favipiravir in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Our protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020206305). Fourteen databases were searched until February 8th, 2021. An update search for new RCTs was done on March 2nd, 2022. Meta-analysis was done for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs. RESULTS: Overall, 157 studies (24 RCTs, 1 non-RCT, 21 observational studies, 2 case series, and 106 case reports) were included. On hospitalized patients, in comparison to standard of care, favipiravir showed a higher rate of viral clearance at day 5 (RR = 1.60, p = 0.02), defervescence at day 3-4 (RR = 1.99, p <0.01), chest radiological improvement (RR = 1.33, p <0.01), hospital discharge at day 10-11 (RR = 1.19, p <0.01), and shorter clinical improvement time (MD = -1.18, p = 0.05). Regarding adverse events, favipiravir groups had higher rates of hyperuricemia (RR = 9.42, p <0.01), increased alanine aminotransferase (RR = 1.35, p <0.01) but lower rates of nausea (RR = 0.42, p <0.01) and vomiting (R R= 0.19, p=0.02). There were no differences regarding mortality (RR=1.19, p=0.32), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (RR = 1.11, p = 0.25). On nonhospitalized patients, no significant differences were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Adding favipiravir to the standard of care provides better outcomes for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Pregnant, lactating women, and patients with a history of hyperuricemia should avoid using favipiravir.

Clinical and laboratory factors associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

SARS Coronavirus-2 is one of the most widespread viruses globally during the 21st century, whose severity and ability to cause severe pneumonia and death vary. We performed a comprehensive systematic review of all studies that met our standardised criteria and then extracted data on the age, symptoms, and different treatments of Covid-19 patients and the prognosis of this disease during follow-up. Cases in this study were divided according to severity and death status and meta-analysed separately using raw mean and single proportion methods. We included 171 complete studies including 62,909 confirmed cases of Covid-19, of which 148 studies were meta-analysed. Symptoms clearly emerged in an escalating manner from mild-moderate symptoms, pneumonia, severe-critical to the group of non-survivors. Hypertension (Pooled proportion (PP): 0.48 [95% Confident interval (CI): 0.35-0.61]), diabetes (PP: 0.23 [95% CI: 0.16-0.33]) and smoking (PP: 0.12 [95% CI: 0.03-0.38]) were highest regarding pre-infection comorbidities in the non-survivor group. While acute respiratory distress syndrome (PP: 0.49 [95% CI: 0.29-0.78]), (PP: 0.63 [95% CI: 0.34-0.97]) remained one of the most common complications in the severe and death group respectively. Bilateral ground-glass opacification (PP: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.59-0.75]) was the most visible radiological image. The mortality rates estimated (PP: 0.11 [95% CI: 0.06-0.19]), (PP: 0.03 [95% CI: 0.01-0.05]), and (PP: 0.01 [95% CI: 0-0.3]) in severe-critical, pneumonia and mild-moderate groups respectively. This study can serve as a high evidence guideline for different clinical presentations of Covid-19, graded from mild to severe, and for special forms like pneumonia and death groups.