-
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Sep 2023Asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) is prevalent in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) and is hypothesized to heighten the risk of subsequent urinary tract infections... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) is prevalent in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) and is hypothesized to heighten the risk of subsequent urinary tract infections (UTIs). Whether antibiotic treatment of ASB in KTRs is beneficial has not been elucidated. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that examined the merits of managing asymptomatic bacteriuria in KTRs. The primary outcomes were rates of symptomatic urinary tract infections (UTIs) and antimicrobial resistance. : Five studies encompassing 566 patients were included. No significant difference in symptomatic UTI rates was found between antibiotics and no treatment groups (relative risk (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.78-1.41), with moderate heterogeneity (I = 36%). Antibiotic treatment was found to present an uncertain risk for the development of drug-resistant strains (RR = 1.51, 95% CI = 0.95-2.40, I = 0%). In all trials, no significant difference between study arms was demonstrated regarding patient and graft outcomes, such as graft function, graft loss, hospitalization due to UTI, all-cause mortality, or acute rejection. : The practice of screening and treating kidney transplant patients for asymptomatic bacteriuria does not curtail the incidence of future symptomatic UTIs, increase antimicrobial resistance, or affect graft outcomes. Whether early treatment of ASB after kidney transplantation (<2 months) is beneficial requires more RCTs.
Topics: Humans; Bacteriuria; Kidney Transplantation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Hospitalization
PubMed: 37763718
DOI: 10.3390/medicina59091600 -
Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease 2021COVID-19 can be asymptomatic in a substantial proportion of patients. The assessment and management of these patients constitute a key element to stop dissemination.
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 can be asymptomatic in a substantial proportion of patients. The assessment and management of these patients constitute a key element to stop dissemination.
AIM
To describe the assessment and treatment of asymptomatic infection in patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19.
METHODS
We searched five databases and search engines for preprints/preproofs, up to August 22, 2020. We included cohort, cross-sectional, and case series studies, reporting the assessment and management of asymptomatic individuals. We extracted data on total discharges with negative PCR, length of hospitalization, treatment, and number of patients who remained asymptomatic. A random-effects model with inverse variance method was used to calculate the pooled prevalence.
RESULTS
41 studies (nine cross-sectional studies, five retrospective studies and 27 reports/case series; 647 asymptomatic individuals), were included, of which 47% were male (233/501). The age of patients was between 1month and 73 years. In patients who became symptomatic, length of hospitalization mean was 13.6 days (SD 6.4). Studies used lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine plus ritonavir/lopinavir, hydroxychloroquine with and without azithromycin, ribavirin plus interferon and interferon alfa. The proportion of individuals who remained asymptomatic was 91% (463/588 patients; 95%CI: 78.3%-98.7%); and asymptomatic individuals discharged with negative PCR was 86% (102/124 individuals; 95%CI: 58.4%-100%).
CONCLUSIONS
There is no standard treatment for asymptomatic COVID-19 individuals. There are no studies of adequate design to make this decision. It has been shown that most asymptomatic individuals who were followed have recovered, but this cannot be attributed to standard treatment.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antiviral Agents; Asymptomatic Infections; Azithromycin; COVID-19; COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing; Child; Child, Preschool; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Hospitalization; Humans; Hydroxychloroquine; Infant; Lopinavir; Male; Middle Aged; Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction; Ritonavir; SARS-CoV-2; Young Adult; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 33838319
DOI: 10.1016/j.tmaid.2021.102058 -
Emerging Infectious Diseases Jun 2016Influenza infection manifests in a wide spectrum of severity, including symptomless pathogen carriers. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 55 studies... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Influenza infection manifests in a wide spectrum of severity, including symptomless pathogen carriers. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 55 studies to elucidate the proportional representation of these asymptomatic infected persons. We observed extensive heterogeneity among these studies. The prevalence of asymptomatic carriage (total absence of symptoms) ranged from 5.2% to 35.5% and subclinical cases (illness that did not meet the criteria for acute respiratory or influenza-like illness) from 25.4% to 61.8%. Statistical analysis showed that the heterogeneity could not be explained by the type of influenza, the laboratory tests used to detect the virus, the year of the study, or the location of the study. Projections of infection spread and strategies for disease control require that we identify the proportional representation of these insidious spreaders early on in the emergence of new influenza subtypes or strains and track how this rate evolves over time and space.
Topics: Asymptomatic Infections; Humans; Influenza A virus; Influenza, Human; Population Surveillance; Prevalence; Publication Bias
PubMed: 27191967
DOI: 10.3201/eid2206.151080 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Sep 2023Although many studies on asymptomatic norovirus infection in outbreaks have been conducted globally, structured data (important for emergency management of outbreaks) on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Although many studies on asymptomatic norovirus infection in outbreaks have been conducted globally, structured data (important for emergency management of outbreaks) on the prevalence of this epidemic are still not available. This study assessed the global prevalence of asymptomatic norovirus infection in outbreaks.
METHODS
We identified publications on asymptomatic infections from norovirus outbreaks by searching the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Medline, and Web of Science databases and screening references from the articles reviewed. Prevalence of asymptomatic norovirus infection in outbreaks was employed as the primary summary data. The random-effects model of the meta-analysis was fitted to generate estimates of the prevalence in the overall and subgroup populations.
RESULTS
In total, 44 articles with a sample size of 8,115 asymptomatic individuals were included. The estimated pooled prevalence of asymptomatic norovirus infection in outbreaks was 21.8% (95%CI, 17.4-27.3). The asymptomatic prevalence of norovirus GII (20.1%) was similar to that of GI (19.8%); however, the proportion prevalence of asymptomatic individuals involved in the former (33.36%) was significantly higher than that of in the latter (0.92%) and the former (93.18%) was reported much more frequently than the latter (15.91%) in the included articles. These studies had significant heterogeneity (I = 92%, τ = 0.4021, P < 0.01). However, the source of heterogeneity could not be identified even after subgroup analysis of 10 possible influencing factors (geographical area, outbreak settings, outbreak seasons, sample types, norovirus genotypes, transmission routes, subjects' occupations, subjects' age, per capita national income, and clear case definition). Meta-regression analysis of these 10 factors demonstrated that the geographical area could be partly responsible for this heterogeneity (P = 0.012).
CONCLUSIONS
The overall pooled asymptomatic prevalence of norovirus in outbreaks was high, with genome II dominating. Asymptomatic individuals may play an important role in norovirus outbreaks. This knowledge could help in developing control strategies and public health policies for norovirus outbreaks.
Topics: Humans; Asymptomatic Infections; Prevalence; Disease Outbreaks; Epidemics; Norovirus
PubMed: 37700223
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08519-y -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022Fluvoxamine is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) that has been approved for the treatment of depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and a variety of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Fluvoxamine is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) that has been approved for the treatment of depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and a variety of anxiety disorders; it is available as an oral preparation. Fluvoxamine has not been approved for the treatment of infections, but has been used in the early treatment of people with mild to moderate COVID-19. As there are only a few effective therapies for people with COVID-19 in the community, a thorough understanding of the current evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of fluvoxamine as an anti-inflammatory and possible anti-viral treatment for COVID-19, based on randomised controlled trials (RCTs), is needed.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of fluvoxamine in addition to standard care, compared to standard care (alone or with placebo), or any other active pharmacological comparator with proven efficacy for the treatment of COVID-19 outpatients and inpatients.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (including Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, medRxiv), Web of Science and WHO COVID-19 Global literature on COVID-19 to identify completed and ongoing studies up to 1 February 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs that compared fluvoxamine in addition to standard care (also including no intervention), with standard care (alone or with placebo), or any other active pharmacological comparator with proven efficacy in clinical trials for the treatment of people with confirmed COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, in both inpatients and outpatients. Co-interventions needed to be the same in both study arms. We excluded studies comparing fluvoxamine to other pharmacological interventions with unproven efficacy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We assessed risk of bias of primary outcomes using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool for RCTs. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence to treat people with asymptomatic to severe COVID-19 for the primary outcomes including mortality, clinical deterioration, clinical improvement, quality of life, serious adverse events, adverse events of any grade, and suicide or suicide attempt.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified two completed studies with a total of 1649 symptomatic participants. One study was conducted in the USA (study with 152 participants, 80 and 72 participants per study arm) and the other study in Brazil (study with 1497 high-risk participants for progression to severe disease, 741 and 756 participants per study arm) among outpatients with mild COVID-19. Both studies were double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in which participants were prescribed 100 mg fluvoxamine two or three times daily for a maximum of 15 days. We identified five ongoing studies and two studies awaiting classification (due to translation issues, and due to missing published data). We found no published studies comparing fluvoxamine to other pharmacological interventions of proven efficacy. We assessed both included studies to have an overall high risk of bias. Fluvoxamine for the treatment of COVID-19 in inpatients We did not identify any completed studies of inpatients. Fluvoxamine for the treatment of COVID-19 in outpatients Fluvoxamine in addition to standard care may slightly reduce all-cause mortality at day 28 (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.27; risk difference (RD) 9 per 1000; 2 studies, 1649 participants; low-certainty evidence), and may reduce clinical deterioration defined as all-cause hospital admission or death before hospital admission (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.89; RD 57 per 1000; 2 studies, 1649 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain regarding the effect of fluvoxamine on serious adverse events (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.03; RD 54 per 1000; 2 studies, 1649 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or adverse events of any grade (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.37; RD 7 per 1000; 2 studies, 1649 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Neither of the studies reported on symptom resolution (clinical improvement), quality of life or suicide/suicide attempt.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on a low-certainty evidence, fluvoxamine may slightly reduce all-cause mortality at day 28, and may reduce the risk of admission to hospital or death in outpatients with mild COVID-19. However, we are very uncertain regarding the effect of fluvoxamine on serious adverse events, or any adverse events. In accordance with the living approach of this review, we will continually update our search and include eligible trials as they arise, to complete any gaps in the evidence.
Topics: Clinical Deterioration; Fluvoxamine; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 36103313
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015391 -
Medicine Feb 2018A high prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria exists in patients prior to arthroplasty, and urinary tract infection is considered to be a source of postoperative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A high prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria exists in patients prior to arthroplasty, and urinary tract infection is considered to be a source of postoperative superficial wound and prosthetic joint infections. There is no consensus whether to screen for and treat asymptomatic bacteriuria before arthroplasty.
OBJECTIVE
To summarize the association between asymptomatic bacteriuria and complications after arthroplasty and to evaluate the clinical benefits of treating asymptomatic bacteriuria prior to arthroplasty.
METHOD
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to retrieve potentially eligible articles. By screening the titles and abstracts of retrieved records and then reading the full texts of the remaining papers, we finally included 8 English-language articles in this systematic review.
RESULTS
Asymptomatic bacteriuria prior to arthroplasty is significantly associated with an increased occurrence of postoperative prosthetic joint and superficial wound infections. However, there is little evidence for direct or hematogenous seeding of urinary infections, and treating asymptomatic bacteriuria before arthroplasty did not decrease the incidence of postoperative infectious complications.
CONCLUSION
Asymptomatic bacteriuria is not a contraindication for arthroplasty, and the practice of routine preoperative screening for and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria should not be continued.
Topics: Aged; Arthroplasty; Asymptomatic Infections; Bacteriuria; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Postoperative Complications; Preoperative Period
PubMed: 29443741
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000009810 -
International Journal of Environmental... Jan 2023Little is known about the long-term consequences of asymptomatic infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We aimed to review the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Little is known about the long-term consequences of asymptomatic infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We aimed to review the data available to explore the long-term consequences of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the real world. We searched observational cohort studies that described the long-term health effects of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. Random-effects inverse-variance models were used to evaluate the pooled prevalence (PP) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of long-term symptoms. Random effects were used to estimate the pooled odds ratios (OR) and its 95%CI of different long-term symptoms between symptomatic and asymptomatic infections. Five studies involving a total of 1643 cases, including 597 cases of asymptomatic and 1043 cases of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in this meta-analysis. The PPs of long-term consequences after asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections were 17.13% (95%CI, 7.55−26.71%) for at least one symptom, 15.09% (95%CI, 5.46−24.73%) for loss of taste, 14.14% (95%CI, −1.32−29.61%) for loss of smell, and 9.33% (95%CI, 3.07−15.60) for fatigue. Compared with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, asymptomatic infection was associated with a significantly lower risk of developing COVID-19-related sequelae (p < 0.05), with 80% lower risk of developing at least one symptom (OR = 0.20, 95%CI, 0.09−0.45), 81% lower risk of fatigue (OR = 0.19, 95%CI, 0.08−0.49), 90% lower risk of loss of taste/smell (OR = 0.10, 95%CI, 0.02−0.58). Our results suggested that there were long-term effects of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, such as loss of taste or smell, fatigue, cough and so on. However, the risk of developing long-term symptoms in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infected persons was significantly lower than those in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection cases.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Ageusia; Asymptomatic Infections; Fatigue
PubMed: 36674367
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20021613 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023In 2021, India contributed for ~79% of malaria cases and ~ 83% of deaths in the South East Asia region. Here, we systematically and critically analyzed data... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
In 2021, India contributed for ~79% of malaria cases and ~ 83% of deaths in the South East Asia region. Here, we systematically and critically analyzed data published on malaria in pregnancy (MiP) in India.
METHODS
Epidemiological, clinical, parasitological, preventive and therapeutic aspects of MiP and its consequences on both mother and child were reviewed and critically analyzed. Knowledge gaps and solution ways are also presented and discussed. Several electronic databases including Google scholar, Google, PubMed, Scopus, Wiley Online library, the Malaria in Pregnancy Consortium library, the World Malaria Report, The WHO regional websites, and ClinicalTrials.gov were used to identify articles dealing with MiP in India. The archives of local scientific associations/journals and website of national programs were also consulted.
RESULTS
Malaria in pregnancy is mainly due to () and (), and on rare occasions to spp. and too. The overall prevalence of MiP is ~0.1-57.7% for peripheral malaria and ~ 0-29.3% for placental malaria. Peripheral infection at antenatal care (ANC) visits decreased from ~13% in 1991 to ~7% in 1995-1996 in Madhya Pradesh, while placental infection at delivery unit slightly decreased from ~1.5% in 2006-2007 to ~1% in 2012-2015 in Jharkhand. In contrast, the prevalence of peripheral infection at ANC increased from ~1% in 2006-2007 to ~5% in 2015 in Jharkhand, and from ~0.5% in 1984-1985 to ~1.5% in 2007-2008 in Chhattisgarh. Clinical presentation of MiP is diverse ranging from asymptomatic carriage of parasites to severe malaria, and associated with comorbidities and concurrent infections such as malnutrition, COVID-19, dengue, and cardiovascular disorders. Severe anemia, cerebral malaria, severe thrombocytopenia, and hypoglycemia are commonly seen in severe MiP, and are strongly associated with tragic consequences such as abortion and stillbirth. Congenital malaria is seen at prevalence of ~0-12.9%. Infected babies are generally small-for-gestational age, premature with low birthweight, and suffer mainly from anemia, thrombocytopenia, leucopenia and clinical jaundice. Main challenges and knowledge gaps to MiP control included diagnosis, relapsing malaria, mixed infection treatment, self-medication, low density infections and utility of artemisinin-based combination therapies.
CONCLUSION
All taken together, the findings could be immensely helpful to control MiP in malaria endemic areas.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Abortion, Spontaneous; Anemia; India; Malaria; Malaria, Vivax; Placenta; Thrombocytopenia
PubMed: 37927870
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1150466 -
Vaccines Jun 2022Background: Asymptomatic infections are potential sources of transmission for coronavirus disease 2019, especially during the epidemic of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant.... (Review)
Review
Background: Asymptomatic infections are potential sources of transmission for coronavirus disease 2019, especially during the epidemic of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. We aimed to assess the percentage of asymptomatic infections among SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant-positive individuals detected by gene sequencing or specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science from 26 November 2021 to 13 April 2022. This meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022327894). Three researchers independently extracted data and two researchers assessed quality using pre-specified criteria. The pooled percentage with 95% confidence interval (CI) of asymptomatic infections of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron was estimated using random-effects models. Results: Our meta-analysis included eight eligible studies, covering 7640 Omicron variant-positive individuals with 2190 asymptomatic infections. The pooled percentage of asymptomatic infections was 32.40% (95% CI: 25.30−39.51%) among SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant-positive individuals, which was higher in the population in developing countries (38.93%; 95% CI: 19.75−58.11%), with vaccine coverage ≥ 80% (35.93%; 95% CI: 25.36−46.51%), with a travel history (40.05%; 95% CI: 7.59−72.51%), community infection (37.97%; 95% CI: 10.07−65.87%), and with a median age < 20 years (43.75%; 95% CI: 38.45−49.05%). Conclusion: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the pooled percentage of asymptomatic infections was 32.40% among SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant-positive individuals. The people who were vaccinated, young (median age < 20 years), had a travel history, and were infected outside of a clinical setting (community infection) had higher percentages of asymptomatic infections. Screening is required to prevent clustered epidemics or sustained community transmission caused by asymptomatic infections of Omicron variants, especially for countries and regions that have successfully controlled SARS-CoV-2.
PubMed: 35891214
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines10071049 -
The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal Mar 2023Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections have raised concerns for public health policies to manage epidemics. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections have raised concerns for public health policies to manage epidemics. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the age-specific proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infected persons globally by year of age.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, medRxiv and Google Scholar on September 10, 2020, and March 1, 2021. We included studies conducted during January to December 2020, before routine vaccination against COVID-19. Because we expected the relationship between the asymptomatic proportion and age to be nonlinear, multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression (QR decomposition) with a restricted cubic spline was used to model asymptomatic proportions as a function of age.
RESULTS
A total of 38 studies were included in the meta-analysis. In total, 6556 of 14,850 cases were reported as asymptomatic. The overall estimate of the proportion of people who became infected with SARS-CoV-2 and remained asymptomatic throughout infection was 44.1% (6556/14,850, 95% CI: 43.3%-45.0%). The predicted asymptomatic proportion peaked in children (36.2%, 95% CI: 26.0%-46.5%) at 13.5 years, gradually decreased by age and was lowest at 90.5 years of age (8.1%, 95% CI: 3.4%-12.7%).
CONCLUSIONS
Given the high rates of asymptomatic carriage in adolescents and young adults and their active role in virus transmission in the community, heightened vigilance and public health strategies are needed among these individuals to prevent disease transmission.
Topics: Child; Adolescent; Young Adult; Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Epidemics; Public Health; Asymptomatic Infections
PubMed: 36730054
DOI: 10.1097/INF.0000000000003791