Evaluating the Effectiveness of Intravenous Ozonated Normal Saline in the Treatment of Severe COVID-19 Disease: A randomized control trial

Q4 Medicine
Amir Janadliean, S. Salmanzadeh, R. Nashibi, S. Alavi, Sasan Moogahi, Saied Bitaraf
{"title":"Evaluating the Effectiveness of Intravenous Ozonated Normal Saline in the Treatment of Severe COVID-19 Disease: A randomized control trial","authors":"Amir Janadliean, S. Salmanzadeh, R. Nashibi, S. Alavi, Sasan Moogahi, Saied Bitaraf","doi":"10.34172/jkmu.2023.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: There is still no specific treatment strategy for COVID-19 other than supportive management. The potential biological benefits of ozone therapy include reduced tissue hypoxia, decreased hypercoagulability, modulated immune function by inhibiting inflammatory mediators, improved phagocytic function, and impaired viral replication. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of intravenous ozonated normal saline on patients with severe COVID-19 disease. Methods: In this study, a single centralized randomized clinical trial was conducted on 80 hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. The patients were selected by random allocation method and divided into two groups A and B. In group A (control group), patients were given standard drug treatment, and in group B (intervention group), patients received ozonated normal saline in addition to the standard drug treatment. In the intervention group, 400 mL of normal saline was weighed by 40 μg/ kg of body weight and was injected into patients within 15 to 30 minutes (80 to 120 drops per minute). This process was done daily every morning for a week. Primary and secondary outcomes of the disease included changes in the following items: length of hospital stay, inflammatory markers including C-reactive protein (CRP), clinical recovery, arterial blood oxygen status, improvement of blood disorders such as leukopenia and leukocytosis, duration of ventilator attachment, and rapid clearance of lung lesions on CT scans. The need for intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization, the length of ICU stay, and the mortality rate in patients of the two groups was compared. Results: According to the results of the initial outcome variable analysis, the probability of discharge of patients who received the normal ozonated saline intervention was 33% higher than patients who did not receive this intervention; however, this relationship was not statistically significant (HR=0.67, 95%, CI=0.42-1.06, P value=0.089). The chance of ICU hospitalization in patients of the intervention group was three times more than that of the comparison group, but this relationship was not significant (odds ratio=4.4 95% CI=1.32-14.50, P value=0.016). The use of ozonated normal saline was found to increase the risk of death by 1.5 times but this relationship was not statistically significant (odds ratio=1.5, 95% CI=.24-9.75, P value=0.646). Ozonated normal saline had a significant effect on changes in respiration rate (in the intervention group the number of breaths was decreased) and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (in the intervention group the erythrocyte sedimentation rate was increased); however, it had no significant effect on other indicators. Conclusion: The present study showed that ozone therapy in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 could help improve some primary and secondary outcomes of the disease. Governments and health policymakers should make ozone therapy an available care service so that the need for advanced treatment facilities decreases; consequently, this measure may improve patient safety, prevent lung tissue destruction, and control cytokine storms in patients. Additionally, health decision-makers need to aim for the effective clinical improvement of patients, especially severe ones, and the reduction of their mortality. However, further large-scale multicenter studies with larger sample sizes considering drug side effects and other variables influencing the clinical course of COVID-19 can provide more information on the effectiveness and importance of ozone therapy.","PeriodicalId":39002,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Kerman University of Medical Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Kerman University of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/jkmu.2023.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is still no specific treatment strategy for COVID-19 other than supportive management. The potential biological benefits of ozone therapy include reduced tissue hypoxia, decreased hypercoagulability, modulated immune function by inhibiting inflammatory mediators, improved phagocytic function, and impaired viral replication. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of intravenous ozonated normal saline on patients with severe COVID-19 disease. Methods: In this study, a single centralized randomized clinical trial was conducted on 80 hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. The patients were selected by random allocation method and divided into two groups A and B. In group A (control group), patients were given standard drug treatment, and in group B (intervention group), patients received ozonated normal saline in addition to the standard drug treatment. In the intervention group, 400 mL of normal saline was weighed by 40 μg/ kg of body weight and was injected into patients within 15 to 30 minutes (80 to 120 drops per minute). This process was done daily every morning for a week. Primary and secondary outcomes of the disease included changes in the following items: length of hospital stay, inflammatory markers including C-reactive protein (CRP), clinical recovery, arterial blood oxygen status, improvement of blood disorders such as leukopenia and leukocytosis, duration of ventilator attachment, and rapid clearance of lung lesions on CT scans. The need for intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization, the length of ICU stay, and the mortality rate in patients of the two groups was compared. Results: According to the results of the initial outcome variable analysis, the probability of discharge of patients who received the normal ozonated saline intervention was 33% higher than patients who did not receive this intervention; however, this relationship was not statistically significant (HR=0.67, 95%, CI=0.42-1.06, P value=0.089). The chance of ICU hospitalization in patients of the intervention group was three times more than that of the comparison group, but this relationship was not significant (odds ratio=4.4 95% CI=1.32-14.50, P value=0.016). The use of ozonated normal saline was found to increase the risk of death by 1.5 times but this relationship was not statistically significant (odds ratio=1.5, 95% CI=.24-9.75, P value=0.646). Ozonated normal saline had a significant effect on changes in respiration rate (in the intervention group the number of breaths was decreased) and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (in the intervention group the erythrocyte sedimentation rate was increased); however, it had no significant effect on other indicators. Conclusion: The present study showed that ozone therapy in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 could help improve some primary and secondary outcomes of the disease. Governments and health policymakers should make ozone therapy an available care service so that the need for advanced treatment facilities decreases; consequently, this measure may improve patient safety, prevent lung tissue destruction, and control cytokine storms in patients. Additionally, health decision-makers need to aim for the effective clinical improvement of patients, especially severe ones, and the reduction of their mortality. However, further large-scale multicenter studies with larger sample sizes considering drug side effects and other variables influencing the clinical course of COVID-19 can provide more information on the effectiveness and importance of ozone therapy.
静脉用臭氧生理盐水治疗重症新冠肺炎疾病的疗效评价:一项随机对照试验
背景:除了支持性管理外,新冠肺炎仍没有具体的治疗策略。臭氧治疗的潜在生物学益处包括减少组织缺氧、降低高凝状态、通过抑制炎症介质调节免疫功能、改善吞噬功能和损害病毒复制。本研究旨在评估静脉臭氧生理盐水治疗重症新冠肺炎患者的效果。方法:对80例重症新冠肺炎住院患者进行单次集中随机临床试验。采用随机分配法将患者分为A组和B组。A组(对照组)给予标准药物治疗,B组(干预组)除标准药物治疗外,还给予臭氧生理盐水治疗。在干预组中,400 mL生理盐水按40μg/kg体重称重,并在15至30分钟内(每分钟80至120滴)注射给患者。这一过程在一周内每天早上进行。该疾病的主要和次要转归包括以下项目的变化:住院时间、包括C反应蛋白(CRP)在内的炎症标志物、临床康复、动脉血氧状况、白细胞减少和白细胞增多等血液疾病的改善、呼吸机连接的持续时间,以及CT扫描上肺部病变的快速清除。比较两组患者的重症监护室(ICU)住院需求、ICU住院时间和死亡率。结果:根据初始结果变量分析的结果,接受正常臭氧盐水干预的患者出院的概率比未接受该干预的患者高33%;但这种关系无统计学意义(HR=0.67,95%,CI=0.42-0.06,P值=0.089)。干预组患者入住ICU的几率是对照组的3倍,但这种关系并不显著(比值比=4.495%可信区间=1.32-14.50,P值=0.016)。发现使用臭氧生理盐水会使死亡风险增加1.5倍,但这种关系在统计学上并不显著(优势比=1.5,95%可信区间=24-9.75,P值=0.646)。臭氧生理盐水对呼吸频率的变化有显著影响(干预组呼吸次数减少)和血沉(干预组血沉增加);然而,它对其他指标没有显著影响。结论:本研究表明,对重症新冠肺炎住院患者进行臭氧治疗有助于改善该疾病的一些原发和继发结果。各国政府和卫生政策制定者应使臭氧治疗成为一项可用的护理服务,以减少对先进治疗设施的需求;因此,这种措施可以提高患者的安全性,防止肺组织破坏,并控制患者体内的细胞因子风暴。此外,卫生决策者需要致力于有效改善患者的临床状况,尤其是重症患者,并降低其死亡率。然而,考虑到药物副作用和其他影响新冠肺炎临床进程的变量,进一步进行大规模多中心研究,样本量更大,可以提供更多关于臭氧治疗有效性和重要性的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信