Abstract

OBJECTIVE To assess the effects of plasma exchange on important outcomes in anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV). DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials investigating effects of plasma exchange in patients with AAV or pauci-immune rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis and at least 12 months' follow-up. INFORMATION SOURCES Prior systematic reviews, updated by searching Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL to July 2020. RISK OF BIAS Reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS Meta-analyses were conducted using random effects models to calculate risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Quality of evidence was summarised in accordance with GRADE methods. Outcomes were assessed after at least12 months of follow-up and included all-cause mortality, end stage kidney disease (ESKD), serious infections, disease relapse, serious adverse events, and quality of life. RESULTS Nine trials including 1060 participants met eligibility criteria. There were no important effects of plasma exchange on all-cause mortality (relative risk 0.90 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.27), moderate certainty). Data from seven trials including 999 participants that reported ESKD demonstrated that plasma exchange reduced the risk of ESKD at 12 months (relative risk 0.62 (0.39 to 0.98), moderate certainty) with no evidence of subgroup effects. Data from four trials including 908 participants showed that plasma exchange increased the risk of serious infections at 12 months (relative risk 1.27 (1.08 to 1.49), moderate certainty). The effects of plasma exchange on other outcomes were uncertain or considered unimportant to patients. LIMITATIONS OF EVIDENCE There is a relative sparsity of events, and treatment effect estimates are therefore imprecise. Subgroup effects at the participant level could not be evaluated. INTERPRETATION For the treatment of AAV, plasma exchange has no important effect on mortality, reduces the 12 month risk of ESKD, but increases the risk of serious infections. FUNDING No funding was received. REGISTRATION This is an update of a previously unregistered systematic review and meta-analysis published in 2014.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain uncertain. To support a guideline on COVID-19 management, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of convalescent plasma in COVID-19 and other severe respiratory viral infections. METHODS In March 2020, we searched international and Chinese biomedical literature databases, clinical trial registries and prepublication sources for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies comparing patients receiving and not receiving convalescent plasma. We included patients with acute coronavirus, influenza and Ebola virus infections. We conducted a meta-analysis using random-effects models and assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS Of 1099 unique records, 6 studies were eligible, and none of these included patients with COVID-19. One nonrandomized study (n = 40) on convalescent plasma in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) provided uninformative results regarding mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] CI 0.01 to 1.70). Pooled estimates from 4 RCTs on influenza (n = 572) showed no convincing effects on deaths (4 RCTs, RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.81), complete recovery (2 RCTs, odds ratio 1.04, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.64) or length of stay (3 RCTs, mean difference -1.62, 95% CI -3.82 to 0.58, d). The quality of evidence was very low for all efficacy outcomes. Convalescent plasma caused few or no serious adverse events in influenza RCTs (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.29, low-quality evidence). INTERPRETATION Studies of non- COVID-19 severe respiratory viral infections provide indirect, very low-quality evidence that raises the possibility that convalescent plasma has minimal or no benefit in the treatment of COVID-19 and low-quality evidence that it does not cause serious adverse events.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Among transfused patients, the effect of the duration of red blood cell storage on mortality remains unclear. This study aims to compare the mortality of patients who were transfused with fresher versus older red blood cells. METHODS We performed an updated systematic search in the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases, from January 2015 to October 2016. RCTs of hospitalized patients of any age comparing transfusion of fresher versus older red blood cells were eligible. We used a random-effects model to calculate pooled risk ratios (RRs) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS We identified 14 randomized trials that enrolled 26 374 participants. All-cause mortality occurred in 1219 of 9531 (12.8%) patients who received a transfusion of fresher red blood cells and 1810 of 16 843 (10.7%) in those who received older red blood cells (RR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.98-1.12, P = 0.90, I2 = 0%, high certainty for ruling out benefit of fresh blood, moderate certainty for ruling out harm of fresh blood). In six studies, in-hospital death occurred in 691 of 7479 (9.2%) patients receiving fresher red cells and 1291 of 14 757 (8.8%) receiving older red cells (RR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.97-1.15, P = 0.81, I2 = 0%, high certainty for ruling out benefit of fresh blood, moderate certainty for ruling out harm of fresh blood). CONCLUSION Transfusion of fresher red blood cells does not reduce overall or in-hospital mortality when compared with older red blood cells. Our results support the practice of transfusing patients with the oldest red blood cells available in the blood bank.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The aim of the CRASH-2 trial was to assess the effects of early administration of tranexamic acid on death, vascular occlusive events, and blood transfusion in trauma patients with significant haemorrhage. Tranexamic acid significantly reduced all-cause mortality. Because tranexamic acid is thought to exert its effect through inhibition of fibrinolysis, we undertook exploratory analyses of its effect on death due to bleeding.METHODS The CRASH-2 trial was undertaken in 274 hospitals in 40 countries. 20,211 adult trauma patients with, or at risk of, significant bleeding were randomly assigned within 8 h of injury to either tranexamic acid (loading dose 1 g over 10 min followed by infusion of 1 g over 8 h) or placebo. Patients were randomly assigned by selection of the lowest numbered treatment pack from a box containing eight numbered packs that were identical apart from the pack number. Both participants and study staff (site investigators and trial coordinating centre staff ) were masked to treatment allocation. We examined the effect of tranexamic acid on death due to bleeding according to time to treatment, severity of haemorrhage as assessed by systolic blood pressure, Glasgow coma score (GCS), and type of injury. All analyses were by intention to treat. The trial is registered as ISRCTN86750102, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00375258, and South African Clinical Trial Register/Department of Health DOH-27-0607-1919.FINDINGS 10,096 patients were allocated to tranexamic acid and 10,115 to placebo, of whom 10,060 and 10,067, respectively, were analysed. 1063 deaths (35%) were due to bleeding. We recorded strong evidence that the effect of tranexamic acid on death due to bleeding varied according to the time from injury to treatment (test for interaction p<0.0001). Early treatment (<=1 h from injury) significantly reduced the risk of death due to bleeding (198/3747 [5.3%] events in tranexamic acid group vs 286/3704 [7.7%] in placebo group; relative risk [RR] 0.68, 95% CI 0.57-0.82; p<0.0001). Treatment given between 1 and 3 h also reduced the risk of death due to bleeding (147/3037 [4.8%] vs 184/2996 [6.1%]; RR 0.79, 0.64-0.97; p=0.03). Treatment given after 3 h seemed to increase the risk of death due to bleeding (144/3272 [4.4%] vs 103/3362 [3.1%]; RR 1.44, 1.12-1.84; p=0.004). We recorded no evidence that the effect of tranexamic acid on death due to bleeding varied by systolic blood pressure, Glasgow coma score, or type of injury.INTERPRETATION Tranexamic acid should be given as early as possible to bleeding trauma patients. For trauma patients admitted late after injury, tranexamic acid is less effective and could be harmful.FUNDING UK NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme, Pfizer, BUPA Foundation, and J P Moulton Charitable Foundation.