No abstract

Objectives Currently published papers and clinical guidelines regarding the effects of tocilizumab in severe and critical COVID-19 are contradictory. The aim of this meta-analysis was to combine the results of clinical studies of different designs to investigate the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in severely-to-critically ill COVID-19 patients. Methods A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Scopus, and preprint servers up to 26 December 2020. Since a substantial heterogeneity was expected, a random-effects model was applied to calculate the pooled effect size (ES) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study outcome. Results Forty-five comparative studies involving 13,189 patients and 28 single-arm studies involving 1,770 patients were analyzed. The risk of mortality (RR of 0.76 [95%CI 0.65 to 0.89], P < 0.01) and intubation (RR of 0.48 [95%CI 0.24 to 0.97], P = 0.04) were lower in tocilizumab patients compared with controls. We did not find any significant difference in secondary infections, length of hospital stay, hospital discharge before day 14, and ICU admission between groups. Conclusion Tocilizumab can improve clinical outcomes and reduce mortality rates in severe to critical COVID-19 patients. Large-scale randomized controlled trials are still required to improve the statistical power of meta-analysis.

Background: The newly emerged coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) seems to involve different organs, including the cardiovascular system. We systematically reviewed COVID-19 cardiac complications and calculated their pooled incidences. Secondarily, we compared the cardiac troponin I (cTnI) level between the surviving and expired patients. Methods: A systematic search was conducted for manuscripts published from December 1, 2019 to April 16, 2020. Cardiovascular complications, along with the levels of cTnI, creatine kinase (CK), and creatine kinase MB (CK-MB) in hospitalized PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients were extracted. The pooled incidences of the extracted data were calculated, and the unadjusted cTnI level was compared between the surviving and expired patients. Results: Out of 1094 obtained records, 22 studies on a total of 4,157 patients were included. The pooled incidence rate of arrhythmia was 10.11%. Furthermore, myocardial injury had a pooled incidence of 17.85%, and finally, the pooled incidence for heart failure was 22.34%. The pooled incidence rates of cTnI, CK-MB, and CK elevations were also reported at 15.16%, 10.92%, and 12.99%, respectively. Moreover, the pooled level of unadjusted cTnI was significantly higher in expired cases compared with the surviving (mean difference = 31.818, 95% CI = 17.923-45.713, P value <0.001). Conclusion: COVID-19 can affect different parts of the heart; however, the myocardium is more involved.

BackgroundSepsis and septic shock is characterized by oxidative stress that mainly promotes systemic inflammation and organ failure due to excessive free radical production and depletion of antioxidant defenses. Therefore, we investigated the effect of selenium administration on antioxidant status, levels of cytokines and clinical outcomes.MethodologyThis study was a prospective randomized control trial (RCT) whereby patients received selenium as sodium selenite (2 mg IV bolus followed by 1.5 mg continuous infusion for 14 days) plus standard therapy. The control group received standard therapy without selenium. The primary endpoint was 28-day mortality. The changes in the mean levels of glutathione peroxidase (GPX) activity, IL-6, IL-8 and IL-10, the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and other secondary endpoints were also recorded. VAP was broken down into early VAP and late VAP to see the clinical significance of each. We also recorded any adverse outcomes from selenium infusion.ResultsOver 24-month period, 54 patients were recruited and randomized and an intention to treat (ITT) principle was applied (selenium, n = 29; control, n = 25) in the final analysis. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in 28-day mortality although it was lower in the selenium group compared with the control group: 9 (31 %) in the selenium versus 10 (40 %) in the control groups (p = 0.49). At day 0, GPX activity was 0.185 ± 0.3 versus 0.19 ± 0.3 U/mL (p = 0.9), day 3, GPX activity was 0.52 ± 0.5 versus 0.17 ± 0.2 U/mL (p = 0.02), at day 7 it was 0.55 ± 0.5 versus 0.24 ± 0.3 U/mL (p = 0.032), at day 10 it was 0.62 ± 0.7 versus 0.33 ± 0.4 U/mL (p = 0.048) and at day 14 it was 1.1 ± 1 versus 0.89 ± 1 U/mL (p = 0.70) for the selenium versus control groups, respectively. However, there were no significant differences between the mean plasma levels of all the three inflammatory cytokines at any point in time between the two groups. There was a significant reduction in occurrence of VAP in the selenium group compared with the control group (55.2 versus 84 %, p = 0.023), respectively.ConclusionHigh-dose selenium administration within the time frame of early goal-directed therapy was not resulted in reduction of 28-day mortality, but increased the activity of glutathione peroxidase with no effect on the levels of inflammatory cytokines at any point in time in mechanically ventilated septic patients. However, selenium supplementation in mechanically ventilated patients following sepsis was associated with reduced occurrence of VAP.Trial registration: IRCT201212082887N4 at WHO Clinical Trial Registry, August 29, 2014