Search

Background and aim: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a significant complication of hepatitis B and still poses a global public health concern. This systematic review and meta-analysis provide adequate details on the prevalence of HCC in the HBV population within Southeast Asian countries. Method: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) criteria, a thorough search for literature discussing the prevalence of HCC in the HBV population within southeast Asia was performed. Eligible studies were subjected to a meta-analysis utilising a DerSimonian and Laird approach and a random effect model. A protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023423953). Result: Our study meticulously recovered 41 articles from seven countries in Southeast Asia, namely Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. A total of 39,050 HBV patients and 7479 HCC cases in southeast Asia were analysed. The pooled prevalence of HCC in HBV cases within southeast Asia was 45.8% (95% CI, 34.3–57.8%, I2 = 99.51%, p < 0.001). Singapore (62.5%, CI: 42.4–79.1) had the highest pooled prevalence of HCC in the HBV population compared to Vietnam, with the lowest estimate (22.4%, CI: 9.9–44.9). There was a drop in the pooled prevalence of HCC in HBV from 2016 until now (37.6%, CI: 19.2–60.5). Conclusion: The findings of this review reveal a high pooled prevalence of HCC in the HBV population and therefore stir the need for routine screening, management, and surveillance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tixagevimab/cilgavimab (TGM/CGM) are neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) directed against different epitopes of the receptor-binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that have been considered as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Objectives: This study seeks to assess the efficacy and safety of TGM/CGM to prevent COVID-19 in patients at high risk for breakthrough and severe SARS-CoV-2 infection who never benefited maximally from SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and for those who have a contraindication to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Design: This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was followed. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, medRxiv, ProQuest, Wiley online library, Medline, and Nature) were searched from 1 December 2021 to 30 November 2022 in the English language using the following keywords alone or in combination: 2019-nCoV, 2019 novel coronavirus, COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019, SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, tixagevimab, cilgavimab, combination, monoclonal, passive, immunization, antibody, efficacy, clinical trial, cohort, pre-exposure, prophylaxis, and prevention. We included studies in moderate to severe immunocompromised adults (aged ≥18 years) and children (aged ≥12 years) who cannot be vaccinated against COVID-19 or may have an inadequate response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. The effect sizes of the outcome of measures were pooled with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and risk ratios (RRs). Results: Of the 76 papers that were identified, 30 articles were included in the qualitative analysis and 13 articles were included in the quantitative analysis (23 cohorts, 5 case series, 1 care report, and 1 randomized clinical trial). Studies involving 27,932 patients with high risk for breakthrough and severe COVID-19 that reported use of TGM/CGM combination were analyzed (all were adults (100%), 62.8% were men, and patients were mainly immunocompromised (66.6%)). The patients' ages ranged from 19.7 years to 79.8 years across studies. TGM/CGM use was associated with lower COVID-19-related hospitalization rate (0.54% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.27), lower ICU admission rate (0.6% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.68), lower mortality rate (0.2% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.67), higher neutralization of COVID-19 Omicron variant rate (12.9% vs. 6%, p = 0.60), lower proportion of patients who needed oxygen therapy (8% vs. 41.2%, p = 0.27), lower RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate (2.1% vs. 5.8%, p < 0.01), lower proportion of patients who had severe COVID-19 (0% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.79), lower proportion of patients who had symptomatic COVID-19 (1.8% vs. 6%, p = 0.22), and higher adverse effects rate (11.1% vs. 10.7%, p = 0.0066) than no treatment or other alternative treatment in the prevention of COVID-19. Conclusion: For PrEP, TGM/CGM-based treatment can be associated with a better clinical outcome than no treatment or other alternative treatment. However, more randomized control trials are warranted to confirm our findings and investigate the efficacy and safety of TGM/CGM to prevent COVID-19 in patients at risk for breakthrough or severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intussusception (ISN) post-COVID-19 infection in children is rare but can occur. SARS-CoV-2 may play a role in the pathogenesis of ISN and trigger immune activation and mesenteric adenitis, which predispose peristaltic activity to "telescope" a proximal bowel segment into the distal bowel lumen. Objectives: To estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in ISN children and analyze the demographic parameters, clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes in ISN pediatric patients with COVID-19 illness. Methods: We performed this systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Studies reporting on the incidence of ISN post-SARS-CoV-2 infection in children, published from 1 December 2019 until 1 October 2022, in PROQUEST, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PUBMED, CINAHL, WILEY ONLINE LIBRARY, SCOPUS and NATURE, with a restriction to articles available in the English language, were included. Results: Of the 169 papers that were identified, 34 articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis (28 case report, 5 cohort and 1 case-series studies). Studies involving 64 ISN patients with confirmed COVID-19 (all patients were children) were analyzed. The overall pooled proportions of the ISN patients who had PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection was 0.06% (95% CI 0.03 to 0.09, n = 1790, four studies, I2 0%, p = 0.64), while 0.07% (95% CI 0.03 to 0.12, n = 1552, three studies, I2 0%, p = 0.47) had success to ISN pneumatic, hydrostatic and surgical reduction treatment and 0.04% (95% CI 0.00 to 0.09, n = 923, two studies, I2 0%, p = 0.97) had failure to ISN pneumatic, hydrostatic and surgical reduction treatment. The median patient age ranged from 1 to 132 months across studies, and most of the patients were in the 1–12 month age group (n = 32, 50%), p = 0.001. The majority of the patients were male (n = 41, 64.1%, p = 0.000) and belonged to White (Caucasian) (n = 25, 39.1%), Hispanic (n = 13, 20.3%) and Asian (n = 5, 7.8%) ethnicity, p = 0.000. The reported ISN classifications by location were mostly ileocolic (n = 35, 54.7%), and few children experienced ileo-ileal ISN (n = 4, 6.2%), p = 0.001. The most common symptoms from ISN were vomiting (n = 36, 56.2%), abdominal pain (n = 29, 45.3%), red currant jelly stools (n = 25, 39.1%) and blood in stool (n = 15, 23.4%). Half of the patients never had any medical comorbidities (n = 32, 50%), p = 0.036. The approaches and treatments commonly used to manage ISN included surgical reduction of the ISN (n = 17, 26.6%), pneumatic reduction of the ISN (n = 13, 20.2%), antibiotics (n = 12, 18.7%), hydrostatic reduction of the ISN (n = 11, 17.2%), laparotomy (n = 10, 15.6%), intravenous fluids (n = 8, 12.5%) and surgical resection (n = 5, 7.8%), p = 0.051. ISN was recurrent in two cases only (n = 2, 3.1%). The patients experienced failure to pneumatic (n = 7, 10.9%), hydrostatic (n = 6, 9.4%) and surgical (n = 1, 1.5%) ISN treatment, p = 0.002. The odds ratios of death were significantly higher in patients with a female gender (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.31–0.79, p = 0.045), Asian ethnicity (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.28–0.48, p < 0.001), failure to pneumatic or surgical ISN reduction treatment (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.05–0.21, p = 0.036), admission to ICU (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.83–1.18, p = 0.03), intubation and placement of mechanical ventilation (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51–1.41, p = 0.01) or suffering from ARDS (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.93–1.88, p = 0.01) compared to those who survived. Conclusion: Children with SARS-CoV-2 infection are at low risk to develop ISN. A female gender, Asian ethnicity, failure to ISN reduction treatment (pneumatic or surgical), admission to ICU, mechanical ventilation and suffering from ARDS were significantly associated with death following ISN in pediatric COVID-19 patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Solid organ rejection post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COVID-19 infection is extremely rare but can occur. T-cell recognition of antigen is the primary and central event that leads to the cascade of events that result in rejection of a transplanted organ. Objectives: To describe the results of a systematic review for solid organ rejections following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COVID-19 infection. Methods: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Proquest, Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL, Wiley online library, Scopus and Nature through the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for studies on the incidence of solid organ rejection post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COVID-19 infection, published from 1 December 2019 to 31 May 2022, with English language restriction. Results: One hundred thirty-six cases from fifty-two articles were included in the qualitative synthesis of this systematic review (56 solid organs rejected post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and 40 solid organs rejected following COVID-19 infection). Cornea rejection (44 cases) was the most frequent organ observed post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and following COVID-19 infection, followed by kidney rejection (36 cases), liver rejection (12 cases), lung rejection (2 cases), heart rejection (1 case) and pancreas rejection (1 case). The median or mean patient age ranged from 23 to 94 years across the studies. The majority of the patients were male (n = 51, 53.1%) and were of White (Caucasian) (n = 51, 53.7%) and Hispanic (n = 15, 15.8%) ethnicity. A total of fifty-six solid organ rejections were reported post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination [Pfizer-BioNTech (n = 31), Moderna (n = 14), Oxford Uni-AstraZeneca (n = 10) and Sinovac-CoronaVac (n = 1)]. The median time from SARS-CoV-2 vaccination to organ rejection was 13.5 h (IQR, 3.2–17.2), while the median time from COVID-19 infection to organ rejection was 14 h (IQR, 5–21). Most patients were easily treated without any serious complications, recovered and did not require long-term allograft rejection therapy [graft success (n = 70, 85.4%), graft failure (n = 12, 14.6%), survived (n = 90, 95.7%) and died (n = 4, 4.3%)]. Conclusion: The reported evidence of solid organ rejections post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COIVD-19 infection should not discourage vaccination against this worldwide pandemic. The number of reported cases is relatively small in relation to the hundreds of millions of vaccinations that have occurred, and the protective benefits offered by SARS-CoV-2 vaccination far outweigh the risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]