Abstract

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of using potential drugs: remdesivir and glucocorticoid in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19 and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in treating MIS-C. We searched seven databases, three preprint platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google from December 1, 2019, to August 5, 2021, to collect evidence of remdesivir, glucocorticoid, and IVIG which were used in children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C. A total of nine cohort studies and one case series study were included in this systematic review. In terms of remdesivir, the meta-analysis of single-arm cohort studies have shown that after the treatment, 54.7% (95%CI, 10.3 to 99.1%) experienced adverse events, 5.6% (95%CI, 1.2 to 10.1%) died, and 27.0% (95%CI, 0 to 73.0%) needed extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or invasive mechanical ventilation. As for glucocorticoids, the results of the meta-analysis showed that the fixed-effect summary odds ratio for the association with mortality was 2.79 (95%CI, 0.13 to 60.87), and the mechanical ventilation rate was 3.12 (95%CI, 0.80 to 12.08) for glucocorticoids compared with the control group. In terms of IVIG, most of the included cohort studies showed that for MIS-C patients with more severe clinical symptoms, IVIG combined with methylprednisolone could achieve better clinical efficacy than IVIG alone.Conclusions: Overall, the current evidence in the included studies is insignificant and of low quality. It is recommended to conduct high-quality randomized controlled trials of remdesivir, glucocorticoids, and IVIG in children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C to provide substantial evidence for the development of guidelines. What is Known: • The efficacy and safety of using potential drugs such as remdesivir, glucocorticoid, and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19/MIS-C are unclear. What is New: • Overall, the current evidence cannot adequately demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of using remdesivir, glucocorticoids, and IVIG in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C. • We are calling for the publication of high-quality clinical trials and provide substantial evidence for the development of guidelines.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Hepatitis C virus (HCV) can be transmitted by blood transfusion. The aim of this meta-analysis is to estimate the anti-HCV reactive rate and to define the demographic characteristics of blood donors who have potential threats to blood safety in mainland China for nearly 30 years, in order to provide a safe reference for blood transfusion and corresponding guidance for policymakers to increase blood safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS Literature reporting the anti-HCV screening reactive rate in Chinese blood donors was identified by systematic searching of four electronic databases from 1991 to 2017. The Preferred Reporting of Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were strictly followed, and data manipulation and statistical analysis were performed by Stata 15.0. RESULTS Our results showed that the post-donation anti-HCV reactive rate was 0.53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51%-0.55%) with a significant variation from 1.58% (95% CI, 1.13%-2.03%) before 1998 to 0.51% (95% CI, 0.48%-0.53%) after 1998 when the Blood Donation Law was implemented in China. In addition, anti-HCV screening reactive rate for family or replacement donors was significantly higher than that in individual voluntary blood donors. CONCLUSION Our results indicated that blood centres in China should convert more eligible first-time donors into repeat donors and turn the 'real family or replacement donors' into individual voluntary blood donors to reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted HCV. In the meantime, large surveys should be carried out among volunteer donors from high-risk populations.

Abstract

Background: Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is usually used as supportive therapy, but the treatment of COVID-19 by IVIG is controversial This rapid review aims to explore the clinical effectiveness and safety of IVIG in the treatment of children with severe COVID-19 Methods: We systematically searched the literature on the use of IVIG in patients with COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), including both adults and children We assessed the risk of bias and quality of evidence and reported the main findings descriptively Results: A total of 1,519 articles were identified by initial literature search, and finally six studies met our inclusion criteria, included one randomized controlled trial (RCT), four case series and one case report involving 198 patients One case series showed the survival of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was not improved by IVIG One case report showed high-dose IVIG could improve the outcome of COVID-19 adults Three observational studies showed inconsistent results of the effect of IVIG on SARS patients One RCT showed that IVIG did not reduce mortality or the incidence of nosocomial infection in adults with severe SARS The quality of evidence was between low and very low Conclusions: The existing evidence is insufficient to support the efficacy or safety of IVIG in the treatment of COVID-19

Abstract

BACKGROUND The reductions of perioperative blood loss and inflammatory response are important in total knee arthroplasty. Tranexamic acid reduced blood loss and the inflammatory response in several studies. However, the effect of epinephrine administration plus tranexamic acid has not been intensively investigated, to our knowledge. In this study, we evaluated whether the combined administration of low-dose epinephrine plus tranexamic acid reduced perioperative blood loss or inflammatory response further compared with tranexamic acid alone. METHODS This randomized placebo-controlled trial consisted of 179 consecutive patients who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty. Patients were randomized into 3 interventions: Group IV received intravenous low-dose epinephrine plus tranexamic acid, Group TP received topical diluted epinephrine plus tranexamic acid, and Group CT received tranexamic acid alone. The primary outcome was perioperative blood loss on postoperative day 1. Secondary outcomes included perioperative blood loss on postoperative day 3, coagulation and fibrinolysis parameters (measured by thromboelastography), inflammatory cytokine levels, transfusion values (rate and volume), thromboembolic complications, length of hospital stay, wound score, range of motion, and Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score. RESULTS The mean calculated total blood loss (and standard deviation) in Group IV was 348.1 +/- 158.2 mL on postoperative day 1 and 458.0 +/- 183.4 mL on postoperative day 3, which were significantly reduced (p < 0.05) compared with Group TP at 420.5 +/- 188.4 mL on postoperative day 1 and 531.1 +/- 231.4 mL on postoperative day 3 and Group CT at 520.4 +/- 228.4 mL on postoperative day 1 and 633.7 +/- 237.3 mL on postoperative day 3. Intravenous low-dose epinephrine exhibited a net anti-inflammatory activity in total knee arthroplasty and did not induce an obvious hypercoagulable status. Transfusion values were significantly reduced (p < 0.05) in Group IV, but no significant differences were observed in the incidence of thromboembolic complications, wound score, range of motion, and HSS score among the 3 groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS The combined administration of low-dose epinephrine and tranexamic acid demonstrated an increased effect in reducing perioperative blood loss and the inflammatory response compared with tranexamic acid alone, with no apparent increased incidence of thromboembolic and other complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Fluid resuscitation is the cornerstone of sepsis treatment. However, whether balanced or unbalanced crystalloids or natural or synthetic colloids confer a survival advantage is unclear. PURPOSE To examine the effect of different resuscitative fluids on mortality in patients with sepsis. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, EMBASE, ACP Journal Club, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through March 2014. STUDY SELECTION Randomized trials that evaluated different resuscitative fluids in adult patients with sepsis or septic shock and death. No language restrictions were applied. DATA EXTRACTION Two reviewers extracted data on study characteristics, methods, and outcomes. Risk of bias for individual studies and quality of evidence were assessed. DATA SYNTHESIS 14 studies (18916 patients) were included with 15 direct comparisons. Network meta-analysis at the 4-node level showed higher mortality with starches than with crystalloids (high confidence) and lower mortality with albumin than with crystalloids (moderate confidence) or starches (moderate confidence). Network meta-analysis at the 6-node level showed lower mortality with albumin than with saline (moderate confidence) and low-molecular-weight starch (low confidence) and with balanced crystalloids than with saline (low confidence) and low- and high-molecular-weight starches (moderate confidence). LIMITATIONS These trials were heterogeneous in case mix, fluids evaluated, duration of fluid exposure, and risk of bias. Imprecise estimates for several comparisons in this network meta-analysis contribute to low confidence in most estimates of effect. CONCLUSION Among patients with sepsis, resuscitation with balanced crystalloids or albumin compared with other fluids seems to be associated with reduced mortality. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE The Hamilton Chapter of the Canadian Intensive Care Foundation and the Critical Care Medicine Residency Program and Critical Care Division Alternate Funding Plan at McMaster University.