1.
Results of the CAPSID randomized trial for high-dose convalescent plasma in severe COVID-19 patients
Körper S, Weiss M, Zickler D, Wiesmann T, Zacharowski K, Corman VM, Grüner B, Ernst L, Spieth P, Lepper PM, et al
The Journal of Clinical Investigation. 2021
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) has been considered a treatment option in COVID-19. This trial assessed the efficacy of neutralizing antibody containing high-dose CCP in hospitalized adults with COVID-19 requiring respiratory support or intensive care treatment. METHODS Patients (n=105) were randomized 1:1 to either receive standard treatment and 3 units of CCP or standard treatment alone. Control group patients with progress on day 14 could cross over to the CCP group. Primary outcome was a dichotomous composite outcome of survival and no longer fulfilling criteria for severe COVID-19 on day 21. RESULTS The primary outcome occurred in 43.4% of patients in the CCP and 32.7% in the control group (p=0.32). The median time to clinical improvement was 26 days in the CCP group and 66 days in the control group (p=0.27). Median time to discharge from hospital was 31 days in the CCP and 51 days in the control group (p=0.24). In the subgroup that received a higher cumulative amount of neutralizing antibodies the primary outcome occurred in 56.0% (versus 32.1%), with significantly shorter intervals to clinical improvement (20 versus 66 days)(p<0.05), and to hospital discharge (21 versus 51 days, p=0.03) and better survival (day-60 probability of survival 91.6% versus 68.1%; p=0.02) compared to the control group. CONCLUSION CCP added to standard treatment was not associated with significant improvement in the primary and secondary outcomes. A pre-defined subgroup analysis showed a significant benefit for CCP among those who received a larger amount of neutralizing antibodies. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04433910FUNDING. German Federal Ministry of Health.
PICO Summary
Population
Hospitalized adults with COVID-19 in centres in Germany, enrolled in the CAPSID trial (n= 105).
Intervention
Convalescent plasma (CCP), (n= 53).
Comparison
Standard care (n= 52).
Outcome
The primary outcome occurred in 43.4% of patients in the CCP and 32.7% in the control group. The median time to clinical improvement was 26 days in the CCP group and 66 days in the control group. Median time to discharge from hospital was 31 days in the CCP and 51 days in the control group. In the subgroup that received a higher cumulative amount of neutralizing antibodies the primary outcome occurred in 56.0% (vs. 32.1%), with significantly shorter intervals to clinical improvement (20 vs. 66 days), and to hospital discharge (21 vs. 51 days) and better survival (day-60 probability of survival 91.6% vs. 68.1%) compared to the control group.
2.
Association of Intravenous Tranexamic Acid With Thromboembolic Events and Mortality: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression
Taeuber I, Weibel S, Herrmann E, Neef V, Schlesinger T, Kranke P, Messroghli L, Zacharowski K, Choorapoikayil S, Meybohm P
JAMA surgery. 2021;:e210884
-
-
-
Free full text
-
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an efficient antifibrinolytic agent; however, concerns remain about the potential adverse effects, particularly vascular occlusive events, that may be associated with its use. OBJECTIVE To examine the association between intravenous TXA and total thromboembolic events (TEs) and mortality in patients of all ages and of any medical disciplines. DATA SOURCE Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and MEDLINE were searched for eligible studies investigating intravenous TXA and postinterventional outcome published between 1976 and 2020. STUDY SELECTION Randomized clinical trials comparing intravenous TXA with placebo/no treatment. The electronic database search yielded a total of 782 studies, and 381 were considered for full-text review. Included studies were published in English, German, French, and Spanish. Studies with only oral or topical tranexamic administration were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Meta-analysis, subgroup and sensitivity analysis, and meta-regression were performed. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Vascular occlusive events and mortality. RESULTS A total of 216 eligible trials including 125 550 patients were analyzed. Total TEs were found in 1020 (2.1%) in the group receiving TXA and 900 (2.0%) in the control group. This study found no association between TXA and risk for total TEs (risk difference = 0.001; 95% CI, -0.001 to 0.002; P = .49) for venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, venous TEs, myocardial infarction or ischemia, and cerebral infarction or ischemia. Sensitivity analysis using the risk ratio as an effect measure with (risk ratio = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94-1.11; P = .56) and without (risk ratio = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.95-1.12; P = .52) studies with double-zero events revealed robust effect size estimates. Sensitivity analysis with studies judged at low risk for selection bias showed similar results. Administration of TXA was associated with a significant reduction in overall mortality and bleeding mortality but not with nonbleeding mortality. In addition, an increased risk for vascular occlusive events was not found in studies including patients with a history of thromboembolism. Comparison of studies with sample sizes of less than or equal to 99 (risk difference = 0.004; 95% CI, -0.006 to 0.014; P = .40), 100 to 999 (risk difference = 0.004; 95% CI, -0.003 to 0.011; P = .26), and greater than or equal to 1000 (risk difference = -0.001; 95% CI, -0.003 to 0.001; P = .44) showed no association between TXA and incidence of total TEs. Meta-regression of 143 intervention groups showed no association between TXA dosing and risk for venous TEs (risk difference, -0.005; 95% CI, -0.021 to 0.011; P = .53). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Findings from this systematic review and meta-analysis of 216 studies suggested that intravenous TXA, irrespective of dosing, is not associated with increased risk of any TE. These results help clarify the incidence of adverse events associated with administration of intravenous TXA and suggest that TXA is safe for use with undetermined utility for patients receiving neurological care.
PICO Summary
Population
Patients of all ages and of any medical disciplines (216 studies, n= 125,550).
Intervention
Intravenous tranexamic acid (TXA).
Comparison
Placebo/no treatment.
Outcome
Total thromboembolic events (TEs) were found in 1020 (2.1%) in the group receiving TXA and 900 (2.0%) in the control group. No association was found between TXA and risk for total TEs for venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, venous TEs, myocardial infarction or ischemia, and cerebral infarction or ischemia. Administration of TXA was associated with a significant reduction in overall mortality and bleeding mortality but not with non-bleeding mortality. An increased risk for vascular occlusive events was not found in studies including patients with a history of thromboembolism. Comparison of studies with sample sizes ranging between less than or equal to 99 and greater than or equal to 1000 showed no association between TXA and incidence of total TEs. Meta-regression of 143 intervention groups showed no association between TXA dosing and risk for venous TEs.
3.
Comparison of common perioperative blood loss estimation techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Gerdessen L, Meybohm P, Choorapoikayil S, Herrmann E, Taeuber I, Neef V, Raimann FJ, Zacharowski K, Piekarski F
Journal of clinical monitoring and computing. 2020
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
Estimating intraoperative blood loss is one of the daily challenges for clinicians. Despite the knowledge of the inaccuracy of visual estimation by anaesthetists and surgeons, this is still the mainstay to estimate surgical blood loss. This review aims at highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of currently used measurement methods. A systematic review of studies on estimation of blood loss was carried out. Studies were included investigating the accuracy of techniques for quantifying blood loss in vivo and in vitro. We excluded nonhuman trials and studies using only monitoring parameters to estimate blood loss. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate systematic measurement errors of the different methods. Only studies that were compared with a validated reference e.g. Haemoglobin extraction assay were included. 90 studies met the inclusion criteria for systematic review and were analyzed. Six studies were included in the meta-analysis, as only these were conducted with a validated reference. The mixed effect meta-analysis showed the highest correlation to the reference for colorimetric methods (0.93 95% CI 0.91-0.96), followed by gravimetric (0.77 95% CI 0.61-0.93) and finally visual methods (0.61 95% CI 0.40-0.82). The bias for estimated blood loss (ml) was lowest for colorimetric methods (57.59 95% CI 23.88-91.3) compared to the reference, followed by gravimetric (326.36 95% CI 201.65-450.86) and visual methods (456.51 95% CI 395.19-517.83). Of the many studies included, only a few were compared with a validated reference. The majority of the studies chose known imprecise procedures as the method of comparison. Colorimetric methods offer the highest degree of accuracy in blood loss estimation. Systems that use colorimetric techniques have a significant advantage in the real-time assessment of blood loss.
PICO Summary
Population
Adult surgery and obstetric patients (90 in vitro and in vivo studies).
Intervention
Visual blood loss estimation methods.
Comparison
Several methods including: gravimetric and colorimetric methods.
Outcome
The mixed effect meta-analysis showed the highest correlation to the reference for colorimetric methods (0.93), followed by gravimetric (0.77) and finally visual methods (0.61). The bias for estimated blood loss (ml) was lowest for colorimetric methods (57.59) compared to the reference, followed by gravimetric (326.36) and visual methods (456.51). Colorimetric methods offer the highest degree of accuracy in blood loss estimation.