Corticosteroids in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
Corticosteroids are now recommended for patients with severe COVID-19 including those with COVID-related ARDS. This has generated renewed interest regarding whether corticosteroids should be used in non-COVID ARDS as well. The objective of this study was to summarize all RCTs examining the use of corticosteroids in ARDS.Methods
The protocol of this study was pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020200659). We searched online databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CDC library of COVID research, CINAHL, and COCHRANE. We included RCTs that compared the effect of corticosteroids to placebo or usual care in adult patients with ARDS, including patients with COVID-19. Three reviewers abstracted data independently and in duplicate using a pre-specified standardized form. We assessed individual study risk of bias using the revised Cochrane ROB-2 tool and rated certainty in outcomes using GRADE methodology. We pooled data using a random effects model. The main outcome for this review was 28-day-mortality.Results
We included 18 RCTs enrolling 2826 patients. The use of corticosteroids probably reduced mortality in patients with ARDS of any etiology (2740 patients in 16 trials, RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.95, ARR 8.0%, 95% CI 2.2-12.5%, moderate certainty). Patients who received a longer course of corticosteroids (over 7 days) had higher rates of survival compared to a shorter course.Conclusion
The use of corticosteroids probably reduces mortality in patients with ARDS. This effect was consistent between patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS, corticosteroid types, and dosage.
SUBMITTER: Chaudhuri D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8054852 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) predisposes patients to venous thromboembolism (VTE) due to risk factors, severe infection, and severe inflammatory responses. The objective is to determine the risk of developing VTE after corticosteroid administration during COVID-19 treatment. Using PRISMA reporting guidelines, a review was conducted from inception until 20 September 2020 with MESH terms including "venous thromboembolism" and "covid-19," using MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, and WHO Global Database. The inclusion criteria included studies with COVID-19 patients aged 18 years and older with VTE diagnosed by duplex ultrasonography or computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA). Exclusion criteria were studies with non COVID-19 patients and non-VTE patients aged less than 18 years. Quality appraisal was conducted of included studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). A random-effect model using 95% confidence intervals, and significance of findings was assessed using Review Manager V5.4.We included 12 observational studies with 2801 patients (VTE n = 434; non-VTE; n = 2367). Patients had a higher risk of presenting with VTE when being administered corticosteroids during treatment of COVID-19 (RR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.77, I2 = 0%). A positive effect size was found (SMD = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.67 to 1.32, I2 = 85%) for D-dimer laboratory values (µg/mL) in the VTE group. While critically ill COVID-19 patients are more likely to require corticosteroid treatment, it may be associated with increased risk of VTE, and poor clinical prognosis. Risk assessment is warranted to further evaluate patients as case-by-case in reducing VTE and worsening clinical outcomes.
| S-EPMC7883150 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Due to a lack of definitive treatment, many drugs were repurposed for Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) treatment; among them, corticosteroid is one. However, its benefit or harm while treating COVID-19 is not fully studied. Thus, we conducted this meta-analysis to assess the rationality on the use of corticosteroids in COVID-19. Pubmed, Medline, Clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane library, and Preprint publisher were searched. In the qualitative syntheses, 41, and quantitative studies, 40, were included using PRISMA guidelines. Assessment of heterogeneity was done using the I-squared (I 2) test and random/fixed effect analysis was done to determine the odds/risk ratio. We found severely ill COVID-19 patients almost 5 (OR 4.78, 2.76-8.26) times higher odds of getting corticosteroids during their treatment. Similarly, the odds for corticosteroids in addition to standard of care (SOC) were approximately 4 (OR 4.09, 1.89-8.84) times higher among intensive care unit (ICU) patients than non-ICU ones. A higher mortality risk with the corticosteroid-receiving group compared with the SOC alone (RR 2.01, 1.12-3.63) was observed. Neither increased discharge rate (RR 0.79, 0.63-0.99) nor recovery/improvement rate was shown among the corticosteroid-receiving group (OR 0.24, 0.13-0.43). Approximately, the overall 4-day longer hospital stay was found among the treatment groups (MD 4.19, 2.57-5.81). For the negative conversion of reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), approximately a 3-day (MD 2.42, 1.31-3.53) delay was observed with corticosteroid treatment cases. Our study concludes that more severe and critically ill patients tend to get corticosteroids, and the mortality risk increases with the use of corticosteroids. With the use of corticosteroids, delayed recovery and a longer hospital stay were observed.
| S-EPMC7569091 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCovid-19 disease is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Although corticosteroids have shown some promising results in Covid-19 patients, their effectiveness remains controversial. In this systematic review, we evaluated the effect of corticosteroids in mortality, Hospitalization, ICU admission, intubation, and mechanical ventilation in Covid-19 patients.MethodsWe searched major databases from March-2020 to Jan-2021. Twenty-nine studies were included after evaluating the eligibility of the literature. The extracted data for mortality, hospitalization, admission to the ICU, intubation, and mechanical ventilation were analyzed with RevMan® 5.4. Categorical variables are presented with odds ratios (OR), and numerical variables are shown with the mean difference.ResultCorticosteroid treatment had no impact on mortality in 18,190 covid patients with OR = 1.12[0.83-1.50]. When we include the randomized controlled trials, corticosteroids reduced the mortality by 20% (OR = 0.80 [0.73, 0.88]; P < 0.001). Additionally, the risk of admission to the ICU, the need for endotracheal intubation, and mechanical ventilation were comparable between patients receiving corticosteroids and controls. The duration of hospitalization was also similar in the two groups.ConclusionCorticosteroid therapy may not be effective for reducing mortality, length of hospitalization, the likelihood of intubation and mechanical ventilation, and ICU admission in patients suffering from Covid-19 pneumonia.
| S-EPMC8684054 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo systematically review the literature about the association between systemic corticosteroid therapy (CST) and outcomes of COVID-19 patients.MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, EBM Reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, and preprints up to July 20, 2020. We included observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCT) that assessed COVID-19 patients treated with CST. We pooled adjusted effect estimates of mortality and other outcomes using a random effect model, among studies at low or moderate risk for bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.ResultsOut of 1067 citations screened for eligibility, one RCT and 19 cohort studies were included (16,977 hospitalized patients). Ten studies (1 RCT and 9 cohorts) with 10,278 patients examined the effect of CST on short term mortality. The pooled adjusted RR was 0.92 (95% CI 0.69-1.22, I2 = 81.94%). This effect was observed across all stages of disease severity. Four cohort studies examined the effect of CST on composite outcome of death, ICU admission and mechanical ventilation need. The pooled adjusted RR was 0.41(0.23-0.73, I2 = 78.69%). Six cohort studies examined the effect of CST on delayed viral clearance. The pooled adjusted RR was 1.47(95% CI 1.11-1.93, I2 = 43.38%).ConclusionIn this systematic review, as of July 2020, heterogeneous and low certainty cumulative evidence based on observational studies and one RCT suggests that CST was not associated with reduction in short-term mortality but possibly with a delay in viral clearance in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 of different severities. However, the discordant results between the single RCT and observational studies as well as the heterogeneity observed across observational studies, call for caution in using observational data and suggests the need for more RCTs to identify the clinical and biochemical characteristics of patients' population that could benefit from CST.
| S-EPMC7522674 | biostudies-literature
Project description:(1) Background: The use of corticosteroids in critical coronavirus infections, including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), or Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has been controversial. However, a meta-analysis on the efficacy of steroids in treating these coronavirus infections is lacking. (2) Purpose: We assessed a methodological criticism on the quality of previous published meta-analyses and the risk of misleading conclusions with important therapeutic consequences. We also examined the evidence of the efficacy of corticosteroids in reducing mortality in SARS, MERS and COVID-19. (3) Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were used to identify studies published until 25 April 2020, that reported associations between steroid use and mortality in treating SARS/MERS/COVID-19. Two investigators screened and extracted data independently. Searches were restricted to studies on humans, and articles that did not report the exact number of patients in each group or data on mortality were excluded. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) or hazard ratios (HRs) under the fixed- and random-effect model. (4) Results: Eight articles (4051 patients) were eligible for inclusion. Among these selected studies, 3416 patients were diagnosed with SARS, 360 patients with MERS, and 275 with COVID-19; 60.3% patients were administered steroids. The meta-analyses including all studies showed no differences overall in terms of mortality (OR 1.152, 95% CI 0.631-2.101 in the random effects model, p = 0.645). However, this conclusion might be biased, because, in some studies, the patients in the steroid group had more severe symptoms than those in the control group. In contrast, when the meta-analysis was performed restricting only to studies that used appropriate adjustment (e.g., time, disease severity), there was a significant difference between the two groups (HR 0.378, 95% CI 0.221-0.646 in the random effects model, p < 0.0001). Although there was no difference in mortality when steroids were used in severe cases, there was a difference among the group with more underlying diseases (OR 3.133, 95% CI 1.670-5.877, p < 0.001). (5) Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study is the first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis providing the most accurate evidence on the effect of steroids in coronavirus infections. If not contraindicated, and in the absence of side effects, the use of steroids should be considered in coronavirus infection including COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7465945 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the effects of corticosteroid therapy for patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsWe comprehensively searched articles published in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, China Biology Medicine (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and VIP databases from January 1, 2019, to March 20, 2021.ResultsA total of 6771 patients from eight prospective studies were included in our meta-analysis. The results showed that corticosteroid therapy was associated with lower mortality in severe COVID-19 (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.54-0.92, P = 0.009; I2 = 54.5%). Since the proportion of the RECOVERY (Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy) trial included in the meta-analysis was as high as 71.88%, we removed it and recalculated the pooled OR. The results of the remaining seven studies still suggested such a survival benefit (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.44-0.96, P = 0.030; I2 = 59.8%). Furthermore, subgroup analysis suggested that the pooled OR of three studies using corticosteroids in the early stages of treatment was much lower (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.25-0.57, P < 0.001; I2 = 47.8%). However, after excluding the RECOVERY trial, the pooled OR of the remaining four studies with unspecific administration timing of corticosteroid therapy no longer supported this result (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.69-1.17, P = 0.415; I2 = 0.0%).ConclusionsIn this meta-analysis, evidence based on seven randomized controlled trials and one prospective cohort study indicates that corticosteroid therapy was associated with a reduction in the mortality of severe COVID-19, especially when administered at an earlier time.
| S-EPMC8413363 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMyopericarditis is a rare complication of vaccination. However, there have been increasing reports of myopericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination, especially among adolescents and young adults. We aimed to characterise the incidence of myopericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination, and compare this with non-COVID-19 vaccination.MethodsWe did a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching four international databases from Jan 1, 1947, to Dec 31, 2021, for studies in English reporting on the incidence of myopericarditis following vaccination (the primary outcome). We included studies reporting on people in the general population who had myopericarditis in temporal relation to receiving vaccines, and excluded studies on a specific subpopulation of patients, non-human studies, and studies in which the number of doses was not reported. Random-effects meta-analyses (DerSimonian and Laird) were conducted, and the intra-study risk of bias (Joanna Briggs Institute checklist) and certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach) were assessed. We analysed the difference in incidence of myopericarditis among subpopulations, stratifying by the type of vaccine (COVID-19 vs non-COVID-19) and age group (adult vs paediatric). Among COVID-19 vaccinations, we examined the effect of the type of vaccine (mRNA or non-mRNA), sex, age, and dose on the incidence of myopericarditis. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021275477).FindingsThe overall incidence of myopericarditis from 22 studies (405 272 721 vaccine doses) was 33·3 cases (95% CI 15·3-72·6) per million vaccine doses, and did not differ significantly between people who received COVID-19 vaccines (18·2 [10·9-30·3], 11 studies [395 361 933 doses], high certainty) and those who received non-COVID-19 vaccines (56·0 [10·7-293·7], 11 studies [9 910 788 doses], moderate certainty, p=0·20). Compared with COVID-19 vaccination, the incidence of myopericarditis was significantly higher following smallpox vaccinations (132·1 [81·3-214·6], p<0·0001) but was not significantly different after influenza vaccinations (1·3 [0·0-884·1], p=0·43) or in studies reporting on various other non-smallpox vaccinations (57·0 [1·1-3036·6], p=0·58). Among people who received COVID-19 vaccines, the incidence of myopericarditis was significantly higher in males (vs females), in people younger than 30 years (vs 30 years or older), after receiving an mRNA vaccine (vs non-mRNA vaccine), and after a second dose of vaccine (vs a first or third dose).InterpretationThe overall risk of myopericarditis after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine is low. However, younger males have an increased incidence of myopericarditis, particularly after receiving mRNA vaccines. Nevertheless, the risks of such rare adverse events should be balanced against the risks of COVID-19 infection (including myopericarditis).FundingNone.
| S-EPMC9000914 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo date, there is no effective treatment for the new coronavirus disease (COVID-19). We aimed to systematically review the literature on the association between the combination of tocilizumab (TCZ) and systemic corticosteroid therapy (SCT) on outcomes of COVID-19 patients.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, and preprints, for studies in which health outcomes were compared between adults with severe COVID-19 who received TCZ and SCT and those who received standard of care without TCZ. Record screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed in duplicate. Random effect models were used when pooling crude numbers and adjusted effect estimates of study outcomes.ResultsOur search identified seventeen studies. The pooled crude mortality rate was lower in the combination arm (relative risk, RR=0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.42 - 0.91; I2=60%). The adjusted mortality rates were also lower in the combination arm (RR=0.58, 95% CI=0.42 - 0.81; I2=71%). The rate of superinfections did not differ between the two interventions.ConclusionsThe findings of this study show that combination of TCZ and SCT compared to SOC has lower mortality rates. There is an urgent need for well-designed randomized trials to assess the safety and efficacy of this combination in subjects with severe COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8278842 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A high incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is reported in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, in particular in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). In patients with respiratory tract infections, including influenza A (H1N1), many studies have demonstrated an increased incidence of thromboses, but evidence is lacking regarding the risk difference (RD) of the occurrence of VTE between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. In this systematic review with meta-analysis, we evaluated the RD of the occurrence of VTE, pulmonary embolism (PE), and deep venous thrombosis (DVT) between COVID-19 and other pulmonary infection cohorts, in particular H1N1, and in an ICU setting. We searched for all studies comparing COVID-19 vs. non-COVID-19 regarding VTE, PE, and DVT. The systematic review included 12 studies and 1,013,495 patients. The RD for VTE in COVID-19 compared to non-COVID-19 patients was 0.06 (95% CI 0.11-0.25, p = 0.011, I2 = 97%), and 0.16 in ICU (95% CI 0.045-0.27, p = 0.006, I2 = 80%). The RD for PE between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients was 0.03 (95% CI, 0.006-0.045, p = 0.01, I2 = 89%). The RD for PE between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients was 0.021 in retrospective studies (95% CI 0.00-0.04, p = 0.048, I2 = 92%) and 0.11 in ICU studies (95% CI 0.06-0.16, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%). The growing awareness and understanding of a massive inflammatory response combined with a hypercoagulable state that predisposes patients to thrombosis in COVID-19, in particular in the ICU, may contribute to a more appropriate strategy of prevention and earlier detection of the thrombotic events.
| S-EPMC8584903 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMany studies confirmed an association between COVID-19 and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Whether the risk of VTE significantly differed between COVID-19 cohorts and non-COVID-19 cohorts with similar disease severity remains unknown.ObjectivesThe aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to compare the rate of VTE between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cohorts with similar disease severity.MethodsA systematic literature search (MEDLINE, Embase and Google Scholar) was conducted from January 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021 to identify studies reporting VTE in COVID-19. Relative risks (RR) were estimated for the effect measure with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsSeven studies (41,768 patients) evaluated VTE in COVID-19 cohorts compared to non-COVID-19 cohorts. The overall risk of VTE (RR 1.18; 95%CI 0.79-1.77; p = 0.42; I2 = 54%), pulmonary embolism (RR 1.25; 95%CI 0.77-2.03; p = 0.36; I2 = 52%) and deep venous thrombosis (RR 0.92; 95%CI 0.52-1.65; p = 0.78; I2 = 0%) did not significantly differ between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cohorts. However, subgroup analyses suggested an increased risk of VTE amongst CODID-19 versus non COVID-19 cohorts when only patients hospitalized within the intensive care unit (ICU) were considered (RR 3.10; 95%CI 1.54-6.23), which was not observed in cohorts of predominantly non-ICU patients (RR 0.95; 95%CI 0.81-1.11) (Pinteraction = 0.001).ConclusionThere was no signal for a difference in VTE in COVID-19 cohorts compared to non-COVID-19 cohorts, except for the subgroup of patients hospitalized in the ICU. These results should be viewed as exploratory and further studies are needed to confirm these results.
| S-EPMC8169236 | biostudies-literature