Premium
Systematic review and meta‐analysis of effectiveness of treatment options against SARS‐CoV‐2 infection
Author(s) -
Thoguluva Chandrasekar Viveksandeep,
Venkatesalu Bhanuprasad,
Patel Harsh K.,
Spadaccini Marco,
Manteuffel Jacob,
Ramesh Mayur
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of medical virology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.782
H-Index - 121
eISSN - 1096-9071
pISSN - 0146-6615
DOI - 10.1002/jmv.26302
Subject(s) - medicine , meta analysis , hydroxychloroquine , odds ratio , adverse effect , confidence interval , randomized controlled trial , mechanical ventilation , coronavirus , intensive care medicine , covid-19 , disease , infectious disease (medical specialty)
Treatment options for severe acute respiratory syndrome‐related coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) are limited with no clarity on efficacy and safety profiles. We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis of studies on patients ≥18 years reporting data on therapeutic interventions in SARS‐CoV‐2. Primary outcome was all‐cause mortality and secondary outcomes were rates of mechanical ventilation, viral clearance, adverse events, discharge, and progression to severe disease. Pooled rates and odds ratios (OR) were calculated. Twenty‐nine studies with 5207 patients were included. Pooled all‐cause mortality in intervention arm was 12.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.1%‐17.4%). Mortality was significantly higher for studies using hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for intervention (OR: 1.36; 95% CI: 0.97‐1.89). Adverse events were also higher in HCQ subgroup (OR: 3.88; 95% CI: 1.60‐9.45). There was no difference in other secondary outcomes. There is a need for well‐designed randomized clinical trials for further investigation of every therapeutic intervention for further insight into different therapeutic options.