-
BMC Infectious Diseases Nov 2023Persons with non-O and Rh-positive blood types are purported to be more susceptible to infection, including SARS-CoV-2, but there remains uncertainty about the degree to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Persons with non-O and Rh-positive blood types are purported to be more susceptible to infection, including SARS-CoV-2, but there remains uncertainty about the degree to which this is so for both non-viral and viral infections.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed Embase and PubMed from January 1 1960 to May 31 2022. English-language publications were selected that separately investigated the relation between ABO and/or Rh blood group and risk of SARS-CoV-2 and non-SARS-CoV-2 infection. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were then generated for each.
RESULTS
Non-O blood groups had a higher OR for SARS-CoV-2 than O blood groups, both within 22 case-control studies (2.13, 95% CI 1.49- 3.04) and 15 cohort studies (1.89, 95% CI 1.56- 2.29). For non-SARS-CoV-2 viral infections, the respective OR were 1.98 (95% CI 1.49-2.65; 4 case-control studies) and 1.87 (95% CI 1.53-2.29; 12 cohort studies). For non-viral infections, the OR were 1.56 (95% CI 0.98-2.46; 13 case-control studies) and 2.11 (95% CI 1.67-6.67; 4 cohort studies). Rh-positive status had a higher OR for SARS-CoV-2 infection within 6 case-control studies (13.83, 95% CI 6.18-30.96) and 6 cohort studies (19.04, 95% CI 11.63-31.17), compared to Rh-negative persons. For Rh status, non-SARS-CoV-2 infections, the OR were 23.45 (95% CI 16.28-33.76) among 7 case-control studies, and 9.25 (95% CI 2.72-31.48) within 4 cohort studies. High measures of heterogeneity were notably observed for all analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
Non-O and Rh-positive blood status are each associated with a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, in addition to other viral and non-viral infections.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Case-Control Studies; Disease Susceptibility; Blood Group Antigens
PubMed: 37964217
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08792-x -
The Journal of Infectious Diseases Nov 2023Adding additional specimen types (eg, serology or sputum) to nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) increases respiratory... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Adding additional specimen types (eg, serology or sputum) to nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) increases respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) detection among adults. We assessed if a similar increase occurs in children and quantified underascertainment associated with diagnostic testing.
METHODS
We searched databases for studies involving RSV detection in persons <18 years using ≥2 specimen types or tests. We assessed study quality using a validated checklist. We pooled detection rates by specimen and diagnostic tests and quantified performance.
RESULTS
We included 157 studies. Added testing of additional specimens to NP aspirate (NPA), NPS, and/or nasal swab (NS) RT-PCR resulted in statistically nonsignificant increases in RSV detection. Adding paired serology testing increased RSV detection by 10%, NS by 8%, oropharyngeal swabs by 5%, and NPS by 1%. Compared to RT-PCR, direct fluorescence antibody tests, viral culture, and rapid antigen tests were 87%, 76%, and 74% sensitive, respectively (pooled specificities all ≥98%). Pooled sensitivity of multiplex versus singleplex RT-PCR was 96%.
CONCLUSIONS
RT-PCR was the most sensitive pediatric RSV diagnostic test. Adding multiple specimens did not substantially increase RSV detection, but even small proportional increases could result in meaningful changes in burden estimates. The synergistic effect of adding multiple specimens should be evaluated.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections; Sensitivity and Specificity; Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human; Viruses; Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures; Nasopharynx; Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction
PubMed: 37285396
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiad185 -
Journal of Infection and Public Health Nov 2023Dengue fever is a zoonotic viral infection that raises a global alarm in the tropics and subtropics, with the potentially escalating into newer geographical regions....
BACKGROUND
Dengue fever is a zoonotic viral infection that raises a global alarm in the tropics and subtropics, with the potentially escalating into newer geographical regions. Severe dengue may be associated with fatal complications such as myocarditis. There is a paucity of available data on the prevalence of dengue-associated myocarditis. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to estimate the global prevalence of dengue-associated myocarditis.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted utilizing the Cochrane library, PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, Web of Science, and Preprint servers such as arXiv, medRxiv, bioRxiv, BioRN, ChiRN, ChiRxiv, and SSRN as of November 25, 2022. All primary studies (case series, cross-sectional, retrospective, and prospective) that reported confirmed cases of dengue myocarditis were included. The I statistic test assessed the heterogenic characteristics and publication bias was evaluated using Doi plot and Egger regression tests.
RESULTS
A total of 12 studies conducted between 2007 and 2022 with 2795 laboratory-confirmed dengue patients were included. Of the included cases, 502 were positive for myocarditis, with a prevalence of 2.4-78%. The pooled prevalence of dengue-induced myocarditis in the studied population was 21.0% (95% CI, 9 - 38%). The prediction interval was estimated to be 0.00 - 0.81.
CONCLUSION
Myocarditis in dengue patients is a significant and understudied complication in many aspects. To prevent dengue-associated myocarditis, appropriate measures such as early detection of cases and signs, symptoms-based diagnosis via electrocardiography and echocardiography, as well as relevant vector control policies must be implemented.
PubMed: 37738692
DOI: 10.1016/j.jiph.2023.08.005 -
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics Dec 2023Patients received kidney transplantation (KTR) have a low seroconversion rate after vaccination. Our objective was to compare the seroconversion rates and adverse... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the seroconversion rates and adverse effects of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine and COVID-19 viral vector vaccine in kidney transplant recipient patients.
Patients received kidney transplantation (KTR) have a low seroconversion rate after vaccination. Our objective was to compare the seroconversion rates and adverse effects of additional different vaccinations in KTR patients in existing studies. Databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and others. Three high-quality RCT were included and showed no statistical difference in seroconversion rates between the two vaccines (RR = 0.93[0.76,1.13]). There was no statistical difference in seroconversion rates between the sexes, for men (RR = 0.93[0.69,1.25]) and women (RR = 0.91[0.62,1.33]). Among the adverse effects there was no statistically significant difference in fever (RR = 1.06[0.44,2.57]), while for injection site pain there was a statistically significant difference (RR = 1.14[1.18,1.84]). There was no significant difference in seroconversion rates in patients with KTR who received the two additional vaccines. Patients injected with the viral vector vaccine were less painful than those injected with the mRNA vaccine.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Antibodies, Viral; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Kidney Transplantation; Seroconversion; Vaccination
PubMed: 37057765
DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2023.2196893 -
The Journal of Hospital Infection Sep 2023This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) comprehensively compared the effectiveness of different mouth rinses in reducing the viral load/infectivity of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) comprehensively compared the effectiveness of different mouth rinses in reducing the viral load/infectivity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) (Part I), alleviating clinical symptoms or severity of disease (Part II), and decreasing the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (Part III).
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) with restrictions were searched up to 3 March 2023. Twenty-three studies (22 RCTs and one NRCT) met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review.
RESULTS
Five RCTs (454 patients and nine interventions) in Part I were eligible for NMA. The NMA results showed that, in comparison with no rinse, sodium chloride (NaCl) was the most effective mouth rinse for reducing the viral load, followed by povidone-iodine (PVP-I), ß-cyclodextrin + citrox (CDCM), hydrogen peroxide (HP), chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX), cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC), placebo and hypochlorous acid (HClO). However, these results were not significant. Based on surface under the cumulative ranking curve scores, PVP-I was likely to be the most efficacious mouth rinse for reducing SARS-CoV-2 viral load, followed by CDCM, HP, NaCl, CHX, CPC, placebo, no rinse and HClO.
CONCLUSION
Due to heterogeneity of the primary studies, the effectiveness of different mouth rinses to reduce viral infectivity, improve clinical symptoms or prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection remains inconclusive.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Mouthwashes; Povidone-Iodine; SARS-CoV-2; Sodium Chloride; Network Meta-Analysis; Hydrogen Peroxide; Mouth
PubMed: 37419189
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2023.06.022 -
Irish Journal of Medical Science Aug 2023Molnupiravir is an oral antiviral drug that received Emergency Use Authorization in three countries for the treatment of mild COVID-19. The aim of this systematic review... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Molnupiravir is an oral antiviral drug that received Emergency Use Authorization in three countries for the treatment of mild COVID-19. The aim of this systematic review was to find out the safety and efficacy of Molnupiravir in SARS-COV-2 infections.
METHODS
The electronic databases such as PubMed, MedRxiv, BioRxiv, FDA, ClinicalTrials.Gov, ctri.nic.in and Google Scholar were searched for articles from January 2021 to March 2022 using the keywords such as "Molnupiravir", "COVID-19", "Oral antiviral pill", "MK-4482", "EIDD-280", "Efficacy" and "Safety". Details of published, unpublished with interim reports and ongoing studies of Molnupiravir in COVID-19 were retrieved, and a systematic review was performed.
RESULTS
A total of 6 articles and 18 ongoing trials data were collected. Out of these, data from 4 published and 2 unpublished with interim reports were extracted. After review of these studies, it was observed that the daily dose of 1600 mg Molnupiravir for 5 days was safe and tolerable with nausea, diarrhea and headache as the common adverse effects. The results also showed significant decrease in time to viral clearance with 800 mg twice daily in mild patients and reduction in the risk of hospitalization or death by 50% in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients.
CONCLUSION
Evidence from clinical studies showed that Molnupiravir caused significant reduction in the risk of hospitalization or death in high-risk mild COVID-19 patients. Molnupiravir was also found to be well tolerated and safe without any major adverse events on short-term use. For confirmative use of this drug in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 disease, further studies are required in vaccinated COVID-19 patients and against emerging variants.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Databases, Factual; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 36087236
DOI: 10.1007/s11845-022-03139-y -
BMC Infectious Diseases Oct 2023COVID-19 has been a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) for a lengthy period of time. The novel coronavirus is primarily spread via aerosols at a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 has been a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) for a lengthy period of time. The novel coronavirus is primarily spread via aerosols at a short distance, with infected individuals releasing large amounts of aerosols when speaking and coughing. However, there is an open question regarding whether mouthwash could effectively reduce virus transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic and support the prevention of infection among medical workers.
METHODS
Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases were systematically searched from the inception of each database to January 12, 2023 for currently available randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on the effect of mouthwash on novel coronavirus load in the oral cavity in COVID-19 patients. The treatment group received mouthwash for rinsing the mouth, while the control group received a placebo or distilled water for COVID-19 patients. The primary outcomes were CT value and viral load. Odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using a random-effects model. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to minimize the bias and the impact of heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Thirteen RCTs were included. Seven studies reported the intervention effect of mouthwash on the CT value of novel coronavirus. The analysis results showed that the mouthwash group had a positive impact on the CT value of novel coronavirus [ SMD = 0.35, 95% CI (0.21, 0.50)] compared with the control group. In addition, subgroup analysis showed a significant positive effect of mouthwash on CT values in the treatment group compared with the control group, with chlorhexidine (CHX) [SMD = 0.33, 95% CI (0.10, 0.56)], povidone-iodine (PVP-I) [SMD = 0.61, 95% CI (0.23, 0.99)], or hydrogen peroxide (HP) [SMD = 1.04, 95% CI (0.30, 1.78)] as an ingredient of the mouthwash. Six studies reported the intervention effect of mouthwash on the viral load, 263 cases in the treatment group and 164 cases in the control group. The analysis results showed that there was no statistical difference between the mouthwash group and the control group in the viral load of novel coronavirus [SMD = -0.06, 95% CI (-0.18, 0.05)]. In the subgroup analysis by measurement time, there were statistically significant differences between the mouthwash and control groups for CT values [SMD = 0.52, 95% CI (0.31, 0.72)] and viral load [SMD = - 0.32, 95% CI (- 0.56, - 0.07)] within 30 min of gargling.
CONCLUSIONS
In summary, mouthwash has some efficacy in reducing the viral load of novel coronavirus, especially within 30 min after rinsing the mouth. Mouthwash containing CHX, PVP-I and HP all had significant positive effects on CT values, and PVP-I-containing mouthwash may be a promising option to control novel coronavirus infections and relieve virus-related symptoms. However, studies on the dose and frequency of use of mouthwash for infection control are still lacking, which may limit the clinical application of mouthwash.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Protocol registration: The protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023401961).
Topics: Humans; Mouthwashes; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Povidone-Iodine; Viral Load; Respiratory Aerosols and Droplets; Chlorhexidine; Hydrogen Peroxide
PubMed: 37821800
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08669-z -
Reviews in Medical Virology Jan 2024Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is one of the immune-mediated demyelinating disorders. Multiple components, including the environment and genetics, are possible factors in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is one of the immune-mediated demyelinating disorders. Multiple components, including the environment and genetics, are possible factors in the pathogenesis of MS. Also, it can be said that infections are a key component of the host's response to MS development. Finally, we evaluated the relationship between different pathogens and MS disease in this umbrella research. We systematically collected and analysed multiple meta-analyses focused on one particular topic. We utilised the Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases starting with inception until 30 May 2023. The methodological quality of the analysed meta-analysis has been determined based on Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 and Grade, and graph construction and statistical analysis were conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. The Confidence Interval of effect size was 95% in meta-analyses, and p < 0.05 indicated a statistically meaningful relationship. The included studies evaluated the association between MS and 12 viruses containing SARS-CoV-2, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), Hepatitis B virus, varicella-zoster virus (VZV), human herpesvirus 6 (HHV-6), HHV-7, HHV-8, HSV-1, HSV-2, Cytomegalovirus, Human Papillomavirus, and influenza. SARS-CoV-2, with a 3.74 odds ratio, has a significantly more potent negative effect on MS among viral infections. After that, EBV, HHV-6, HSV-2, and VZV, respectively, with 3.33, 2.81, 1.76, and 1.72 odds ratios, had a significantly negative relationship with MS (p < 0.05). Although the theoretical evidence mostly indicates that EBV has the greatest effect on MS, recent epidemiological studies have challenged this conclusion and put forward possibilities that SARS-CoV-2 is the culprit. Hence, it was necessary to investigate the effects of SARS-CoV-2 and EBV on MS.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Sclerosis; Herpesvirus 4, Human; Epstein-Barr Virus Infections; Virus Diseases; Viruses; Herpesvirus 3, Human
PubMed: 38010852
DOI: 10.1002/rmv.2494 -
Periodontology 2000 Feb 2024Three years into the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there are still growing concerns with the emergence of different variants, unknown long- and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Three years into the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there are still growing concerns with the emergence of different variants, unknown long- and short-term effects of the virus, and potential biological mechanisms underlying etiopathogenesis and increased risk for morbidity and mortality. The role of the microbiome in human physiology and the initiation and progression of several oral and systemic diseases have been actively studied in the past decade. With the proof of viral transmission, carriage, and a potential role in etiopathogenesis, saliva and the oral environment have been a focus of COVID-19 research beyond diagnostic purposes. The oral environment hosts diverse microbial communities and contributes to human oral and systemic health. Several investigations have identified disruptions in the oral microbiome in COVID-19 patients. However, all these studies are cross-sectional in nature and present heterogeneity in study design, techniques, and analysis. Therefore, in this undertaking, we (a) systematically reviewed the current literature associating COVID-19 with changes in the microbiome; (b) performed a re-analysis of publicly available data as a means to standardize the analysis, and (c) reported alterations in the microbial characteristics in COVID-19 patients compared to negative controls. Overall, we identified that COVID-19 is associated with oral microbial dysbiosis with significant reduction in diversity. However, alterations in specific bacterial members differed across the study. Re-analysis from our pipeline shed light on Neisseria as the potential key microbial member associated with COVID-19.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Dysbiosis; Microbiota; Mouth; Oropharynx; Saliva; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 37277934
DOI: 10.1111/prd.12489 -
Transplantation Direct Aug 2023The optimal strategy for cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease prevention in CMV donor/recipient kidney transplant recipients remains uncertain. Conclusions of prior...
A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Optimized CMV Preemptive Therapy and Antiviral Prophylaxis for CMV Disease Prevention in CMV High-Risk (D+R-) Kidney Transplant Recipients.
UNLABELLED
The optimal strategy for cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease prevention in CMV donor/recipient kidney transplant recipients remains uncertain. Conclusions of prior meta-analyses that CMV disease rates with preemptive therapy (PET) and universal prophylaxis (UP) were comparable may have been affected by inclusion of studies lacking key determinants of efficacy of the respective strategies.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of PET with weekly CMV polymerase chain reaction monitoring for ≥3 mo and UP with 6 mo of valganciclovir. PubMed and Embase databases were reviewed from January 1, 2010, to April 1, 2022. Risk of bias was assessed with 3 instruments (Cochrane RoB, Cochrane RoBINS-I, and an instrument for assessing risk in observational studies). The primary outcome was CMV disease incidence by 1-y posttransplant. Secondary outcomes by 1-y were graft loss, acute allograft rejection, and mortality. Results were synthesized using generalized linear mixed model meta-analysis. PET studies were stratified into low-threshold (LT) and high-threshold (HT) PET based on the viral load threshold for initiation of antiviral therapy.
RESULTS
Twenty-five studies met inclusion criteria (6 PET, 19 UP). CMV disease incidence was significantly higher in HT (0.30 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.22-0.39]) versus LT PET (0.06 [95% CI, 0.03-0.12]). LT PET was associated with a significantly lower CMV disease incidence (0.06 [95% CI, 0.03-0.12]) versus UP (0.21 [95% CI, 0.17-0.27]). Incidence of graft loss, acute allograft rejection, or mortality was not significantly different between LT PET and UP ( > 0.05 for all comparisons). Receipt of lymphocyte-depleting antibodies was not associated with a significant difference in CMV disease incidence (odds ratio = 1.34 [95% CI, 0.80-2.25]).
CONCLUSIONS
LT PET is associated with a significantly lower incidence of CMV disease compared to UP with similar rates of other clinical outcomes. These findings provide rationale and preliminary data for a randomized superiority trial of optimized LT-PET versus UP in donor seropositive recipient seronegative kidney transplant recipients.
PubMed: 37456587
DOI: 10.1097/TXD.0000000000001514