Objectives: To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of arbidol and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using a meta-analysis method.Methods: The China Knowledge Network, VIP database, WanFang database PubMed database, Embase database, and Cochrane Library were searched for a collection of comparative studies on arbidol and lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19. Meta-analysis was used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Arbidol and lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19.
Results:The results of the systematic review indicated that Arbidol had a higher positive-to-negative conversion rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acid on Day 7 (p = 0.03), a higher positiveto-negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid on Day 14 (p = 0.006), a higher improvement rate of chest computed tomography on Day 14 (p = 0.02), a lower incidence of adverse reactions (p = 0.002) and lower rate of mortality (p = 0.007). There was no difference in the rate of cough disappearance on Day 14 (p = 0.24) or the rate of severe/critical illness (p = 0.07) between the two groups.Conclusions: Arbidol may be superior to lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19. However, due to the small number of included studies and the number of patients, high-quality multicenter large-sample randomized double-blind controlled trials are still needed for verification.arbidol, coronavirus disease 2019, lopinavir/ritonavir, meta-analysis
| INTRODUCTIONCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a clinical syndrome that predominantly affects the acute respiratory tract and is caused by a new type of coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which has broken out globally. 1,2 The disease is characterized by pneumonia with fever, cough, shortness of breath, and fatigue as the main symptoms. Severe and critical cases of COVID-19 may result in respiratory failure and renal failure and thus can be life endangering. 3 There is no effective and specific treatment plan for COVID-19 infection, 4,5 and there is an urgent need to find an effective antiviral drug against SARS-CoV-2. At present, many choices of treatment drugs come from the clinical treatment experience of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) infections. [6][7][8] Based on previous
Background The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis comparing the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic versus open resection for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) larger than 5 cm. Method We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase for relevant articles. Randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials were identified and included in this study. Searching for related articles on large GIST (>5 cm) for laparoscopic resection (laparoscopic group [LAPG]) and open resection (open group [OG]), RevMan 5.3 was used for data analysis, comparing 2 groups of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, complications, length of hospital stay, recurrence rate, disease-free survival, and overall survival. Results Seven studies including 440 patients were identified for the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that LAPG had less bleeding, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and a better 5-year disease-free survival. There was no significant difference between LAPG and OG in operation time, postoperative complications, recurrence rate, and overall survival. Conclusion Laparoscopic resection of large (>5 cm) GIST is safe and feasible and has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss and fast postoperative recovery, with a good outcome in the recent oncology.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.