Search

IMPORTANCEMany hospitalized patients with COVID-19 have been treated with convalescent plasma. However, it is uncertain whether this therapy lowers mortality and if so, if the mortality benefit is larger among specific subgroups, such as recipients of plasma with high antibody content and patients treated early in the disease course.OBJECTIVETo examine the association of COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion with mortality and the differences between subgroups in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.DATA SOURCESOn October 26, 2022, a systematic search was performed for clinical studies of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in the literature.STUDY SELECTIONRandomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies investigating COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion compared with standard of care treatment or placebo among hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 were included. The electronic search yielded 3,841 unique records, of which 744 were considered for full-text screening. The selection process was performed independently by a panel of five reviewers.DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESISThe study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data were extracted by 5 independent reviewers in duplicate and pooled using inverse-variance random-effects model.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESPrespecified end point was all-cause mortality during hospitalization.RESULTSThirty-nine randomized clinical trials enrolling 21,529 participants and 70 matched cohort studies enrolling 50,160 participants were included in the systematic review. Separate meta-analyses demonstrated that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a significant decrease in mortality compared with the control cohort for both randomized clinical trials (odds ratio (OR), 0.87 [95% CI, 0.76-1.00]) and matched cohort studies (OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.64-0.94]). Meta-analysis of subgroups revealed two important findings. First, treatment with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels was associated with a decrease in mortality compared to convalescent plasma containing low antibody levels (OR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.73 to 0.99]). Second, earlier treatment with COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a significant decrease in mortality compared with the later treatment cohort (OR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.82]).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCECOVID-19 convalescent plasma use was associated with a 13% reduced risk in mortality, implying a mortality benefit for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, particularly those treated with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels treated earlier in the disease course.Key PointsQuestionWhat is the evidence regarding the potential mortality benefit associated with transfusion of convalescent plasma in hospitalized patients with COVID-19?FindingsIn this meta-analysis of 39 randomized clinical trials enrolling 21,529 participants and 70 matched cohort studies enrolling 50,160 participants, transfusion of convalescent plasma was associated with a 13% mortality benefit. Subgroup analyses revealed that patients treated with plasma containing higher levels of antibodies and patients treated earlier in the course of the disease had a greater mortality benefit associated with COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion.MeaningThese findings suggest that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma is associated with a mortality benefit for hospitalized patients, particularly those treated earlier in the disease course.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update on key safety metrics after transfusion of convalescent plasma in hospitalized coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) patients, having previously demonstrated safety in 5000 hospitalized patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From April 3 to June 2, 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration Expanded Access Program for COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfused a convenience sample of 20,000 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 convalescent plasma. RESULTS: The incidence of all serious adverse events was low; these included transfusion reactions (n=78

Successful therapeutics and vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have harnessed the immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Evidence that SARS-CoV-2 exists as locally evolving variants suggests that immunological differences may impact the effectiveness of antibody-based treatments such as convalescent plasma and vaccines. Considering that near-sourced convalescent plasma likely reflects the antigenic composition of local viral strains, we hypothesize that convalescent plasma has a higher efficacy, as defined by death within 30 days of transfusion, when the convalescent plasma donor and treated patient were in close geographic proximity. Results of a series of modeling techniques applied to approximately 28,000 patients from the Expanded Access to Convalescent Plasma program (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT04338360) support this hypothesis. This work has implications for the interpretation of clinical studies, the ability to develop effective COVID-19 treatments, and, potentially, for the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines as additional locally-evolving variants continue to emerge., Regional differences in SARS-CoV-2 variants may affect treatment outcome. Here, the authors show that near-sourced convalescent plasma has higher efficacy, as defined by death within 30 days of transfusion, than plasma sourced more than 150 miles away.

Contains fulltext : 232887.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) under the presumption that such plasma contains potentially therapeutic antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that can be passively transferred to the plasma recipient. Whether convalescent plasma with high antibody levels rather than low antibody levels is associated with a lower risk of death is unknown. METHODS: In a retrospective study based on a U.S. national registry, we determined the anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels in convalescent plasma used to treat hospitalized adults with Covid-19. The primary outcome was death within 30 days after plasma transfusion. Patients who were enrolled through July 4, 2020, and for whom data on anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels in plasma transfusions and on 30-day mortality were available were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Of the 3082 patients included in this analysis, death within 30 days after plasma transfusion occurred in 115 of 515 patients (22.3%) in the high-titer group, 549 of 2006 patients (27.4%) in the medium-titer group, and 166 of 561 patients (29.6%) in the low-titer group. The association of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels with the risk of death from Covid-19 was moderated by mechanical ventilation status. A lower risk of death within 30 days in the high-titer group than in the low-titer group was observed among patients who had not received mechanical ventilation before transfusion (relative risk, 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 0.91), and no effect on the risk of death was observed among patients who had received mechanical ventilation (relative risk, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with Covid-19 who were not receiving mechanical ventilation, transfusion of plasma with higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels was associated with a lower risk of death than transfusion of plasma with lower antibody levels. (Funded by the Department of Health and Human Services and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04338360.).

ImportancePassive antibody transfer is a longstanding treatment strategy for infectious diseases that involve the respiratory system. In this context, human convalescent plasma has been used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the efficacy remains uncertain.ObjectiveTo explore potential signals of efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma.DesignOpen-label, Expanded Access Program (EAP) for the treatment of COVID-19 patients with human convalescent plasma.SettingMulticenter, including 2,807 acute care facilities in the US and territories.ParticipantsAdult participants enrolled and transfused under the purview of the US Convalescent Plasma EAP program between April 4 and July 4, 2020 who were hospitalized with (or at risk of) severe or life threatening acute COVID-19 respiratory syndrome.InterventionTransfusion of at least one unit of human COVID-19 convalescent plasma using standard transfusion guidelines at any time during hospitalization. Convalescent plasma was donated by recently-recovered COVID-19 survivors, and the antibody levels in the units collected were unknown at the time of transfusion.Main Outcomes and MeasuresSeven and thirty-day mortality.ResultsThe 35,322 transfused patients had heterogeneous demographic and clinical characteristics. This cohort included a high proportion of critically-ill patients, with 52.3% in the intensive care unit (ICU) and 27.5% receiving mechanical ventilation at the time of plasma transfusion. The seven-day mortality rate was 8.7% [95% CI 8.3%-9.2%] in patients transfused within 3 days of COVID-19 diagnosis but 11.9% [11.4%-12.2%] in patients transfused 4 or more days after diagnosis (p18.45 S/Co), seven-day mortality was 8.9% (6.8%, 11.7%); for recipients of medium IgG plasma (4.62 to 18.45 S/Co) mortality was 11.6% (10.3%, 13.1%); and for recipients of low IgG plasma (Conclusions and RelevanceThe relationships between reduced mortality and both earlier time to transfusion and higher antibody levels provide signatures of efficacy for convalescent plasma in the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. This information may be informative for the treatment of COVID-19 and design of randomized clinical trials involving convalescent plasma.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04338360Key PointsQuestionDoes transfusion of human convalescent plasma reduce mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients?FindingsTransfusion of convalescent plasma with higher antibody levels to hospitalized COVID-19 patients significantly reduced mortality compared to transfusions with low antibody levels. Transfusions within three days of COVID-19 diagnosis yielded greater reductions in mortality.MeaningEmbedded in an Expanded Access Program providing access to COVID-19 convalescent plasma and designed to assess its safety, several signals consistent with efficacy of convalescent plasma in the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients emerged.

BACKGROUNDConvalescent plasma is the only antibody-based therapy currently available for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has robust historical precedence and sound biological plausibility. Although promising, convalescent plasma has not yet been shown to be safe as a treatment for COVID-19.METHODSThus, we analyzed key safety metrics after transfusion of ABO-compatible human COVID-19 convalescent plasma in 5000 hospitalized adults with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, with 66% in the intensive care unit, as part of the US FDA expanded access program for COVID-19 convalescent plasma.RESULTSThe incidence of all serious adverse events (SAEs), including mortality rate (0.3%), in the first 4 hours after transfusion was

Media coverage on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been extensive, yet large gaps remain in our understanding of the role of social media platforms during worldwide health crisis. The purpose of this study was to assess the most viewed YouTube videos on COVID-19 for medical content. We coded video characteristics, source, and medical content of the 113 most-widely viewed videos about COVID-19. Seventy-nine (69.9%) videos were classified as useful, and 10 (8.8%) videos were classified as misleading. Independent users were more likely to post misleading videos than useful videos (60.0% vs 21.5%

A rare manifestation during the post-anesthetic period may include the occurrence of functional neurological symptom disorder (FNSD). FNSD is described as neurological symptoms that are not consistently explained by neurological or medical conditions. We report a case series consisting of six patients who underwent a general anesthetic at a tertiary referral hospital and experienced FNSD in the immediate post-anesthetic period. Life-threatening causes were excluded based on benign physical exam findings and knowledge of past history. Five of six cases manifested with FNSD only in the immediate post-operative setting after exposure to anesthesia, and never otherwise experienced these symptoms during their normal daily lives. MEDLINE and Google Scholar were searched through October 2019 using a highly-sensitive search strategy and identified 38 published cases of post-anesthetic FNSD. Meta-analysis of pooled clinical data revealed that a significant proportion of patients were females (86%), reported a history of psychiatric illness (49%), reported a prior history of FNSD (53%), and underwent general anesthesia as the primary anesthetic (93%). The majority of patients were exposed to diagnostic studies (66% received radiographic tests and 52% received electroencephalogram) as well as pharmacologic therapy (57%). While no deaths occurred, many patients had unanticipated admission to the hospital (53%) or to the intensive care unit (25%). These data may help inform the anesthesia literature on presentation, risk factors, and treatment outcomes of FNSD in the context of anesthetic administration. We contemplate whether anesthetic agents may predispose a vulnerable brain to manifest with involuntary motor and sensory control seen in FNSD.

Background. Anesthetic management of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) can be challenging. Management involves responding to sudden hemodynamic shifts, addressing instability, and performing ongoing volume assessment. To best prepare for these perturbations, various monitors are used intraoperatively. We sought to explore the impact of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) use on outcomes of patients undergoing OLT. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed records of patients who underwent OLT at a single institution and included all who were monitored intraoperatively with TEE alone, PAC alone, or both methods concurrently (TEE + PAC). We determined whether these groups had differences in length of hospitalization (primary outcome), 30-day mortality rate, and other outcomes. Results. Three hundred eighteen liver transplant operations were included in the study. Patients in the TEE + PAC group had the shortest median length of hospitalization (TEE + PAC, 8.6 days; TEE, 10.3; PAC, 9.1; P = 0.04). The TEE + PAC group also had the lowest 30-day mortality rate (TEE + PAC, n = 1 [1.3%]; TEE, n = 5 [12.8%]; PAC, n = 7 [3.5%]; P = 0.009). However, the TEE + PAC group also had the highest rate of a new postoperative need for dialysis (TEE + PAC, n = 8 [10.3%]; TEE, n = 2 [5.1%]; PAC, n = 1 [0.5%]; P < 0.001). Conclusions. Compared with either TEE alone or PAC alone, intraoperative monitoring with TEE + PAC during OLT was associated with the shortest length of hospitalization and lowest 30-day mortality rate. Transplant anesthesiologists should be aware of the potential benefit on patient mortality and hospital length of stay with concurrent intraoperative TEE + PAC monitoring and the increased need for new postoperative dialysis.

Objectives To determine the incidence of contraindications to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) among adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and assess the impact of contraindications on the number of patients receiving ECMO (case volume). Background The extent to which contraindications may affect case volumes has not been described. Methods Retrospective, observational study at an academic tertiary medical center. The records of 730 consecutive patients with ARDS were queried for respiratory ECMO eligibility and ECMO contraindications. Results Of the 730 patients with ARDS, 168 (23.0%) met ECMO inclusion criteria and 515 (70.5%) never met ECMO eligibility due to inadequately severe disease. Among 168 patients who met ECMO inclusion criteria, 1 or more relative contraindications were present in 144 (85.7%) patients. The three most common relative contraindications were immunocompromised state (58.3%), multiorgan dysfunction (29.2%) and contraindication to anticoagulation (16.7%). Conclusions Application of relative contraindications may greatly affect ECMO case volumes.