静脉注射免疫球蛋白(IVIG)治疗COVID-19患者的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2.1 Q3 CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL
Behzad Fatemi, Soheila Rezaei, Mohammad Peikanpour, Farzaneh Dastan, Ali Saffaei
{"title":"静脉注射免疫球蛋白(IVIG)治疗COVID-19患者的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Behzad Fatemi,&nbsp;Soheila Rezaei,&nbsp;Mohammad Peikanpour,&nbsp;Farzaneh Dastan,&nbsp;Ali Saffaei","doi":"10.4103/1735-5362.378082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Though controversial, many clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 cases. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis have been performed to evaluate the efficacy of IVIG in the treatment of COVID-19 patients.</p><p><strong>Experimental approach: </strong>A systematic search was performed in electronic databases and preprint servers up to November 20, 2021. Since substantial heterogeneity was expected, a random-effects model was applied to pool effect size from included studies to calculate the standardized mean differences (SMDs) for the continuous variables and relative risks (RRs) for the dichotomous variable with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Findings/results: </strong>Five randomized clinical trials and seven cohort studies were analyzed among the 12 eligible studies with a total of 2,156 patients. The pooled RR of mortality was 0.77 (CI 0.59-1.01, <i>P</i>-value = 0.06), and of mechanical ventilation was 1.50 (CI 0.29-7.83; <i>P</i>-value = 0.63) in the IVIG group compared with the standard care group. The pooled SMD of hospital length of stay was 0.84 (CI -0.43-2.11; <i>P</i>-value = 0.20) and of ICU length of stay was -0.07 (CI -0.92-0.78; <i>P</i>-value = 0.86) in the IVIG group compared with the standard care group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion and implications: </strong>This meta-analysis found that the IVIG therapy was not statistically different from the standard care group. Mortality, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and length of ICU stay were not significantly improved among IVIG recipients. However, statistical indifference is not equal to clinical indifference.</p>","PeriodicalId":21075,"journal":{"name":"Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences","volume":"18 4","pages":"346-357"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/42/70/RPS-18-346.PMC10443666.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Behzad Fatemi,&nbsp;Soheila Rezaei,&nbsp;Mohammad Peikanpour,&nbsp;Farzaneh Dastan,&nbsp;Ali Saffaei\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/1735-5362.378082\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Though controversial, many clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 cases. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis have been performed to evaluate the efficacy of IVIG in the treatment of COVID-19 patients.</p><p><strong>Experimental approach: </strong>A systematic search was performed in electronic databases and preprint servers up to November 20, 2021. Since substantial heterogeneity was expected, a random-effects model was applied to pool effect size from included studies to calculate the standardized mean differences (SMDs) for the continuous variables and relative risks (RRs) for the dichotomous variable with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Findings/results: </strong>Five randomized clinical trials and seven cohort studies were analyzed among the 12 eligible studies with a total of 2,156 patients. The pooled RR of mortality was 0.77 (CI 0.59-1.01, <i>P</i>-value = 0.06), and of mechanical ventilation was 1.50 (CI 0.29-7.83; <i>P</i>-value = 0.63) in the IVIG group compared with the standard care group. The pooled SMD of hospital length of stay was 0.84 (CI -0.43-2.11; <i>P</i>-value = 0.20) and of ICU length of stay was -0.07 (CI -0.92-0.78; <i>P</i>-value = 0.86) in the IVIG group compared with the standard care group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion and implications: </strong>This meta-analysis found that the IVIG therapy was not statistically different from the standard care group. Mortality, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and length of ICU stay were not significantly improved among IVIG recipients. However, statistical indifference is not equal to clinical indifference.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21075,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"18 4\",\"pages\":\"346-357\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/42/70/RPS-18-346.PMC10443666.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/1735-5362.378082\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/1735-5362.378082","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景与目的:尽管存在争议,但已经进行了许多临床试验来评估静脉注射免疫球蛋白(IVIG)对COVID-19患者的疗效。因此,我们进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析来评估IVIG治疗COVID-19患者的疗效。实验方法:系统检索截止到2021年11月20日的电子数据库和预印本服务器。由于预期存在很大的异质性,因此将随机效应模型应用于纳入研究的效应大小,以计算连续变量的标准化平均差异(SMDs)和具有95%置信区间(ci)的二分类变量的相对风险(rr)。结果/结果:在12项符合条件的研究中,分析了5项随机临床试验和7项队列研究,共计2156例患者。死亡率的合并RR为0.77 (CI 0.59 ~ 1.01, p值= 0.06),机械通气的合并RR为1.50 (CI 0.29 ~ 7.83;p值= 0.63),IVIG组与标准治疗组比较。住院时间的综合SMD为0.84 (CI -0.43-2.11;p值= 0.20),ICU住院时间为-0.07 (CI -0.92-0.78;p值= 0.86),与标准治疗组比较。结论和意义:本荟萃分析发现IVIG治疗与标准治疗组无统计学差异。IVIG受者的死亡率、ICU入院率、机械通气、住院时间和ICU住院时间均无显著改善。然而,统计上的无差异并不等于临床无差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background and purpose: Though controversial, many clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 cases. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis have been performed to evaluate the efficacy of IVIG in the treatment of COVID-19 patients.

Experimental approach: A systematic search was performed in electronic databases and preprint servers up to November 20, 2021. Since substantial heterogeneity was expected, a random-effects model was applied to pool effect size from included studies to calculate the standardized mean differences (SMDs) for the continuous variables and relative risks (RRs) for the dichotomous variable with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Findings/results: Five randomized clinical trials and seven cohort studies were analyzed among the 12 eligible studies with a total of 2,156 patients. The pooled RR of mortality was 0.77 (CI 0.59-1.01, P-value = 0.06), and of mechanical ventilation was 1.50 (CI 0.29-7.83; P-value = 0.63) in the IVIG group compared with the standard care group. The pooled SMD of hospital length of stay was 0.84 (CI -0.43-2.11; P-value = 0.20) and of ICU length of stay was -0.07 (CI -0.92-0.78; P-value = 0.86) in the IVIG group compared with the standard care group.

Conclusion and implications: This meta-analysis found that the IVIG therapy was not statistically different from the standard care group. Mortality, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and length of ICU stay were not significantly improved among IVIG recipients. However, statistical indifference is not equal to clinical indifference.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences
Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
19.00%
发文量
50
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊介绍: Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences (RPS) is included in Thomson Reuters ESCI Web of Science (searchable at WoS master journal list), indexed with PubMed and PubMed Central and abstracted in the Elsevier Bibliographic Databases. Databases include Scopus, EMBASE, EMCare, EMBiology and Elsevier BIOBASE. It is also indexed in several specialized databases including Scientific Information Database (SID), Google Scholar, Iran Medex, Magiran, Index Copernicus (IC) and Islamic World Science Citation Center (ISC).
×
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