Convalescent Plasma Transfusion Research Articles

The Effects of Convalescent Plasma Transfusion on Serum Levels of Macrophage-Associated Inflammatory Biomarkers in Patients with Severe COVID-19.

As an antibody-based therapy, plasma therapy has been used as an emergency therapeutic strategy against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infection. Due to the critical role of macrophages in coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19)-associated hyperinflammation, the main objective of this study was to assess the effect of plasma transfusion on the expression levels of the inflammatory biomarkers involved in activation and pulmonary infiltration of macrophages. The target population included 50 severe hospitalized COVID-19 patients who were randomly assigned into 2 groups, including intervention and control. Serum levels of chemokine (C-C motif) ligand (CCL)-2, CCL-3, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, and interleukin (IL)-6 were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Moreover, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was carried out to assess the relative expression of nuclear factor (NF)-κB1, NF-κB2, nuclear factor erythroid 2 p45-related factor 2 (NRF-2), and thioredoxin-interacting protein genes. Sampling was done at baseline and 72 h after receiving plasma. The intervention group demonstrated significantly lower serum levels of IL-6, TNF-α, and CCL-3. In addition, real-time PCR data analyses showed that the relative expression of NF-κB2 was significantly declined in the patients who received plasma. The use of convalescent plasma probably has a significant inhibitory effect on the cytokines, chemokines, and inflammatory genes related to macrophage activation, which are closely associated with the worsening of clinical outcomes in severe COVID-19.

Erratum for Karaba et al., "Endemic Human Coronavirus Antibody Levels Are Unchanged after Convalescent or Control Plasma Transfusion for Early Outpatient COVID-19 Treatment".

Erratum for Karaba et al., "Endemic Human Coronavirus Antibody Levels Are Unchanged after Convalescent or Control Plasma Transfusion for Early Outpatient COVID-19 Treatment".

Effect of SARS-CoV-2 IgG Seroconversion After Convalescent Plasma Transfusion on Hospital Outcomes in COVID-19

Effect of SARS-CoV-2 IgG Seroconversion After Convalescent Plasma Transfusion on Hospital Outcomes in COVID-19

Convalescent Plasma Treatment for Moderate to Critical Ill COVID-19 Patients – A Safe but Futile Treatment: A Non-Randomized Comparative Study

Background: In a number of cases of viral infection, convalescent plasma therapy has been effective. Reportedly, the use of convalescent plasma as a therapy for COVID-19 patients with severe and life-threatening disorders is beneficial at this time. This study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of convalescent plasma transfusions in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Subjects and Method: This was a clinical trial employing a non-randomized comparative study. A historical control group (21 samples) and convalescent plasma transfusions (21 samples) was selected consecutively from hospitalized COVID-19 patients between May 6th, 2020, and May 6th, 2021 at Dr. Moewardi General Hospital. We assessed and quantified viral clearance in the laboratory. Statistical analysis is performed in SPSS version 20.0. Results: Plasma was taken from fifteen convalescent donors. In the plasma convalescent treatment group, there was a statistically significant difference between outcome and severity degree (p = 0.005). In addition, there was a substantial discrepancy between the result group and the control group (p 0.005). Significant differences in post-treatment NLR between the control and treatment groups (p 0.005). In addition, there were statistically significant differences between the control and treatment groups in post-treatment hsCRP levels (p 0.005). In addition, there were statistically significant differences (p 0.005) between all groups' inflammatory markers and outcomes. Conclusion: Using convalescent plasma to treat patients with COVID-19 is a rather safe practice. Our analysis demonstrated that the administration of convalescent plasma did not enhance survival or clinical outcomes for COVID-19 patients with moderate to severe disease. Keywords: COVID-19, convalescent therapy, critical ill

An umbrella review on treatments and therapeutic options for COVID-19

Introduction. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to pose a significant challenge to global health, effective therapeutic options for preventing and treating the disease have become increasingly important. We aimed to provide an update on current treatments and therapeutic options for COVID-19 patients.Materials and methods. The purpose of this umbrella review is to explore the current treatments and therapeutic options for COVID-19 patients. Keywords and their combinations were searched across online databases in Embase, PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus spanning from July 1, 2020, through March 3, 2023. Publications were selected for data extraction in two steps based on the study inclusion/exclusion criteria. The study adheres to the PRISMA checklist as well as NIH bias risk and quality assessment tool.Results. In this review, 28 relevant articles were selected for the final qualitative synthesis. The majority of included studies had reported on the efficacy of Lopinavir/Ritonavir (n = 4), Ivermectin (n = 3), Baricitinib (n = 2), Tocilizumab (n = 2), Remdesivir (n = 2), ACEI/ARB (n = 2), Vitamin D (n = 2), Molnupiravir (n = 2), Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) (n = 2), Convalescent plasma transfusion (CPT) (n = 2) and hydroxychloroquine (n = 2) in treating COVID-19. It appeared that Baricitinib, Remdesivir, ACEI/ARB, TCM, and CPT may have beneficial effects on reducing mortality, hospitalization duration, and disease severity in COVID-19 patients. Other interventions, such as Lopinavir/Ritonavir, Ivermectin, Vitamin D, and Hydroxychloroquine did not show clear benefits or had inconclusive results.Conclusion. This umbrella review provides a comprehensive overview of the current evidence on the effectiveness and safety of various pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for COVID-19. These results provide an updated overview of the current landscape for COVID-19 treatments, highlighting potential avenues for further research and clinical practice. It is crucial to continue monitoring emerging evidence and conducting rigorous studies to guide the development and optimization of therapeutic strategies against COVID-19.

Factors associated with mortality among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 disease treated with convalescent plasma.

The use of convalescent plasma (CP) for hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection might be a useful option in certain settings. Soon after the outbreak of COVID-19, the National Ministry of Health of Argentina recommended the use of CP transfusion for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 disease. Between 1 June and 3 October 2020, 480 patients, excluding those on invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), received at least one CP infusion in the province of Santa Fe. We aimed to find factors associated with mortality among this cohort of patients. The median age was 60 years (interquartile range: 49-69 years) and 320 (66.7%) were males. Most of these patients (93.75%) received a single CP infusion, 82.1% and 95.6% before day 4 and day 7 of hospitalization, respectively. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 titers were determined in the CP units administered using Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S assay. At 28 days of follow-up, 250 patients were discharged (52.1%), 131 (27.3%) remained hospitalized without and 16 (3.3%) with oxygen requirement, 27 (5.6%) were on IMV, and 56 (11.7%) had died. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the factors significantly associated with 28-day mortality were (i) requirement of IMV, (ii) the administration of CP after the third day of hospitalization, (iii) age, and (iv) number of comorbidities. The qualitative and quantitative analyses of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in the infused CP were not associated with mortality. Our findings may imply a seemingly favorable effect of CP administration among patients with severe COVID-19 disease when infused sooner after hospitalization.IMPORTANCEThe use of convalescent plasma (CP) could be an option for patients with severe COVID-19, especially in poor-resource countries where direct antiviral drugs are not commercially available. Currently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration limits the CP administration for outpatients and inpatients with COVID-19 who are immunocompromised and only if high levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are confirmed in the CP unit. Although most of the randomized clinical trials failed to show a clear-cut benefit of CP in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19, other studies have shown that if given early in the course of the disease, it might be a useful therapeutic option. In this retrospective study, we demonstrated that early treatment (within 3 days of hospitalization) was significantly associated with reduced 28-day mortality compared with those patients treated beyond day 3. The results from our study add up to the scientific evidence on the use of CP as a relatively safe, cheap, and possibly effective therapy in certain patients suffering from severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Mortality Rates Among Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 Treated With Convalescent Plasma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ObjectiveTo examine the association of COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion with mortality and the differences between subgroups in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Patients and MethodsOn October 26, 2022, a systematic search was performed for clinical studies of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in the literature from January 1, 2020, to October 26, 2022. Randomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies investigating COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion compared with standard of care treatment or placebo among hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 were included. The electronic search yielded 3841 unique records, of which 744 were considered for full-text screening. The selection process was performed independently by a panel of 5 reviewers. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data were extracted by 5 independent reviewers in duplicate and pooled using an inverse-variance random effects model. The prespecified end point was all-cause mortality during hospitalization. ResultsThirty-nine randomized clinical trials enrolling 21,529 participants and 70 matched cohort studies enrolling 50,160 participants were included in the systematic review. Separate meta-analyses reported that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the control cohort for both randomized clinical trials (odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-1.00) and matched cohort studies (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.88). The meta-analysis of subgroups revealed 2 important findings. First, treatment with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with convalescent plasma containing low antibody levels (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.99). Second, earlier treatment with COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the later treatment cohort (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.82). ConclusionDuring COVID-19 convalescent plasma use was associated with a 13% reduced risk of mortality, implying a mortality benefit for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, particularly those treated with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels treated earlier in the disease course.

Use of covid-19 convalescent plasma to treat patients admitted to hospital for covid-19 with or without underlying immunodeficiency: open label, randomised clinical trial

ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of covid-19 convalescent plasma to treat patients admitted to hospital for moderate covid-19 disease with or without underlying immunodeficiency (CORIPLASM trial).DesignOpen label, randomised clinical trial.SettingCORIMUNO-19 cohort...

Different COVID-19 treatments’ impact on hospital length of stay

ImportanceCOVID-19 has adversely affected global healthcare infrastructure since 2019. Currently, there are no large-scale published reports on the efficacy of combination therapy of dexamethasone, remdesivir, and tocilizumab on COVID-19 patients.ObjectivesIs the combination therapy of dexamethasone, remdesivir, and tocilizumab superior to other treatments on hospitalized COVID-19 patients?DesignThis is a retrospective, comparative effectiveness study.SettingSingle-center studyParticipants/interventionsWe analyzed different inpatient COVID-19 treatment options available in the United States and their impact on hospital length of stay (LOS) and mortality. Hospitalized COVID-19 were categorized as “mild,” “moderate” and “severe'' based on the highest level of oxygen required; room air, nasal cannula, or high flow/PAP/intubation, respectively. Patients were treated in accordance with the availability of medications and the latest treatment guidelines.Main outcomesThe endpoints of the study are hospital discharges and death during hospitalization.Results1233 COVID-19 patients were admitted from 2020 to 2021. No treatment combinations showed a statistically significant decrease in hospital LOS in mild COVID-19 patients (p = 0.186). In moderate patients, the combination of remdesivir and dexamethasone slightly decreased LOS by 1 day (p = 0.007). In severe patients, the three-drug combination of remdesivir, dexamethasone, and tocilizumab decreased LOS by 8 days (p = 0.0034) when compared to nonviable treatments, such as hydroxychloroquine and convalescent plasma transfusion. However, it did not show any statistically significant benefit when compared to two-drug regimens (dexamethasone plus remdesivir) in severe COVID-19 (p = 0.116). No treatment arm appeared to show a statistically significant decrease in mortality for severe COVID-19 patients.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that three-drug combination may decrease LOS in severe COVID-19 patients when compared to two-drug therapy. However, the trend was not supported by statistical analysis. Remdesivir may not be clinically beneficial for mild hospitalized COVID-19 patients; considering its cost, one could reserve it for moderate and severe patients. Triple drug therapies, while potentially reducing LOS for severe patients, do not affect overall mortality. Additional patient data may increase statistical power and solidify these findings.

Intranasal administration of convalescent plasma protects against SARS-CoV-2 infection in hamsters.

Convalescent plasma (CP) transfusion is an early option for treating infections with pandemic potential, often preceding vaccine or antiviral drug rollout. Heterogenous findings from randomized clinical trials on transfusion of COVID-19 CP (CCP) have been reported. However, meta-analysis suggests that transfusion of high titer CCP is associated with a mortality benefit for COVID-19 outpatients or inpatients treated within 5 days after symptom onset, indicating the importance of early administration. We tested if CCP is an effective prophylactic against SARS-CoV-2 infection by the intranasal administration of 25μL CCP/nostril (i.e. 0.01-0.06mg anti-RBD antibodies/kg) in hamsters exposed to infected littermates. In this model, 40% of CCP treated hamsters were fully protected and 40% had significantly reduced viral loads, the remaining 20% was not protected. The effect seems dose-dependent because high-titer CCP from a vaccinated donor was more effective than low-titer CCP from a donation prior to vaccine rollout. Intranasal administration of human CCP resulted in a reactive (immune) response in hamster lungs, however this was not observed upon administration of hamster CCP. We conclude that CCP is an effective prophylactic when used directly at the site of primary infection. This option should be considered in future prepandemic preparedness plans. Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship (VLAIO) and the Foundation for Scientific Research of the Belgian Red Cross Flanders.

Convalescent Plasma Transfusion in Severe or critically ill COVID 19 patients: A Rapid Systematic Review

Currently, there is no availability of any proven specific treatment or prevention strategy to fight against COVID-19. Convalescent plasma (CP) therapy is expected to increase survival rates in COVID-19 as in the case of emerging viral infection (SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV). To collect all the studies relevant to CP therapy in critically ill or severe COVID-19 patients and summarize the findings. The systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA consensus statement. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases on April 25, 2020. A total of six studies (28 patients) relevant to CP therapy in severe or critical COVID-19 are considered for inclusion. Two authors extracted the data about study characteristics, demographics, symptoms, co-morbidities, clinical classification of COVID-19, drug therapies, oxygen therapy, laboratory results, chest CT, neutralizing antibody titer, SARS-CoV-2 RNA load, aal outcome. The review findings revealed that CP therapy increases lymphocyte count, reduced s serum inflammatory markers (CRP, IL-6, Procalcitonin) and liver enzyme levels (AST or ALT). There was a rise in serum neutralizing antibody titers in 10 of 14 patients after CP transfusion. In 4 of 14 patients, the titer levels remain unchanged after CP transfusion. All 28 cases (100%) achieved negative to the SARS-CoV-2 RNA after CP transfusion. The convalescent plasma transfusion can improve neutralizing antibody titers and reduces the viral load in severe/critical COVID-19 patients. The review recommends a well-controlled trial design is required to give a definite statement on the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in severe/critical COVID-19.

Convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review.

Convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review.

Immune Plasma for the Treatment of COVID-19: Lessons Learned so far.

COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) has been explored as one of the treatment options for COVID-19. Results of many cohort studies and clinical trials have been recently published. At first glance, the results of the CCP studies appear to be inconsistent. However, it became clear that CCP is not beneficial if CCP with low anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations is used, if it is administered late in advanced disease stages, and to patients who already mounted an antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 at the time of CCP transfusion. On the other hand, CCP may prevent progression to severe COVID-19 when very high-titer CCP is given early in vulnerable patients. Immune escape of new variants is a challenge for passive immunotherapy. While new variants of concern developed resistance to most clinically used monoclonal antibodies very rapidly, immune plasma from individuals immunized by both a natural SARS-CoV-2 infection and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination retained neutralizing activity against variants. This review briefly summarizes the evidence on CCP treatment to date and identifies further research needs. Ongoing research on passive immunotherapy is not only relevant for improving care for vulnerable patients in the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, but even more as a model for passive immunotherapy in case of future pandemics with a newly evolving pathogen. Compared to other drugs, which must be newly developed in a pandemic (e.g., monoclonal antibodies, antiviral drugs), convalescent plasma is rapidly available, inexpensive to produce, and can be adaptive to viral evolution by selection of contemporary convalescent donors.

COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma for the Treatment of Immunocompromised Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Patients who are immunocompromised have increased risk for morbidity and mortality associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) because they less frequently mount antibody responses to vaccines. Although neutralizing anti-spike monoclonal-antibody treatment has been widely used to treat COVID-19, evolutions of SARS-CoV-2 have been associated with monoclonal antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants and greater virulence and transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2. Thus, the therapeutic use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma has increased on the presumption that such plasma contains potentially therapeutic antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 that can be passively transferred to the plasma recipient. To assess the growing number of reports of clinical experiences of patients with COVID-19 who are immunocompromised and treated with specific neutralizing antibodies via COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion. On August 12, 2022, a systematic search was performed for clinical studies of COVID-19 convalescent plasma use in patients who are immunocompromised. Randomized clinical trials, matched cohort studies, and case report or series on COVID-19 convalescent plasma use in patients who are immunocompromised were included. The electronic search yielded 462 unique records, of which 199 were considered for full-text screening. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data were extracted by 3 independent reviewers in duplicate and pooled. The prespecified end point was all-cause mortality after COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion; exploratory subgroup analyses were performed based on putative factors associated with the potential mortality benefit of convalescent plasma. This systematic review and meta-analysis included 3 randomized clinical trials enrolling 1487 participants and 5 controlled studies. Additionally, 125 case series or reports enrolling 265 participants and 13 uncontrolled large case series enrolling 358 participants were included. Separate meta-analyses, using models both stratified and pooled by study type (ie, randomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies), demonstrated that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the control cohort for the amalgam of both randomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies (risk ratio [RR], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.50-0.79]). These findings suggest that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma is associated with mortality benefit for patients who are immunocompromised and have COVID-19.

Convalescent Plasma as Adjunctive Therapy for Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: The Co-CLARITY Trial

Background and Objective. Convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) may reduce the risk of disease progression among patients with COVID-19. This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CPT in preventing ICU admission among hospitalized COVID-19 patients.Methods. In this open-label randomized controlled trial, we randomly assigned hospitalized adult patients withCOVID-19 in a 1:1 ratio to receive convalescent plasma as an adjunct to standard of care or standard of care alone. The primary endpoint was ICU admission within first 28 days of enrolment. Primary safety endpoints include rapid deterioration of respiratory or clinical status within four hours of convalescent plasma transfusion and cumulative incidence of serious adverse events during the study period including transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI), transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO), severe allergic reactions, and transfusion-related infections.Results. A total of 22 patients were assigned to receive convalescent plasma as an adjunct to standard of care and 22 to receive standard of care alone. The median time from onset of COVID-19 symptoms to study enrolment was eight days (IQR, 4 to 10). Two patients (9.1%) in the CPT group and one patient (4.5%) in the control group were admitted to the ICU. The primary outcome measure, ICU admission, was not different between the two groups (q-value >0.9). No patient who received convalescent plasma had rapid deterioration of respiratory/clinical status within four hours of transfusion and none developed TRALI, TACO, anaphylaxis, severe allergic reactions, or transfusion-related infections. There was also no significant difference in the secondary outcomes of 28-day mortality (two patients in the CPT group and none in the control group, q-value >0.90), dialysis-free days, vasopressor-free days, and ICU-free days. Conclusions. Among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, no significant differences were observed in the need forICU admission between patients given CPT as adjunct to standard of care and those who received standard ofcare alone. Interpretation is limited by early termination of the trial which may have been underpowered todetect a clinically important difference.

Clinical nursing care protocol for convalescent plasma transfusion in patients with COVID-19

IntroductionThe treatment of COVID-19 is still challenge. So convalescent plasma can be an important alternative of treatment. Protocols with nursing care during infusion is very important to guide an effective and safety care Objectiveto analyze the evidence in the literature on the action of convalescent plasma, of the use of protocols with nursing care to use convalescent plasma and build a nursing care protocol for transfusion in patients with COVID-19. MethodsMethodological study carried out in two stages: scoping review. The search was done using the descriptors: convalescent plasma transfusion, convalescent plasma, and acute respiratory syndromes or COVID-19, to found protocols and effectiveness of convalescent plasm. Beside was done a specialist panel to build the protocol. ResultsLow-evidence studies have shown improvement in the clinical signs of COVID-19 using Convalescent Plasma, reduction or elimination of viral load, benefits in the production of lymphocytes, decreases C-reactive protein, increases titers of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, positive evolution in lung involvement identified by X-rays, decrease in hospitalization. No studies were found in the databases on the protocol for clinical nursing care in plasma transfusion. Therefore, a protocol was developed with the description of clinical nursing care to be performed before, during and after the transfusion by plasma: checking of vital signs and indicative signs of transfusion reaction, measurement of oxygen saturation, assessment of venous access and checking of the level of consciousness. ConclusionThere are no evidence studies to support the use of plasma, nor anything related to bundles.

Alteration of Lung Physiology with the Administration of Convalescent Plasma in ARDS Patients Intubated with COVID-19 Pneumonia

Background: It remains unknown to what degree lung physiology is altered by administration of convalescent plasma in patients intubated with ARDS due to COVID-19 pneumonia. Although no longer clinically used as treatment for COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy could be deployed again should new virus threats emerge in the future. Aim: To evaluate changes in ventilator physiologic variables in response to convalescent plasma transfusion using a retrospective, observational, case control study of intubated patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: Patients who were receiving mechanical ventilation due to COVID-19 at the time of administration of convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) were matched to control patients who did not receive convalescent plasma. Ventilatory data such as compliance, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), FiO2 administered, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, and tidal volume were collected pre and post administration. Panel-level random-effects linear regression models were used to assess the mean difference and interactions between CPT and cases vs controls over time. Results: 12 patients received CPT while intubated and were matched to 35 intubated control patients who did not receive CPT. In total, 857 separate measurements of static compliance were obtained over time. No significant difference in static compliance was seen after CPT. In cases, adjusted mean static compliance was 30.8 (95% CI (23.3, 38.4))mL/cm H2O before CPT and 28.2 (95% CI (20.7,35.6)) mL/cm H2O afterwards. Controls adjusted mean static compliance was 33.9 (95% CI (29.5, 38.4)) mL/cm H2O before versus 32.2 (95% CI (27.9, 36.5)) mL/cm H2O afterwards. Variables that had small but statistically significant differences pre vs post CPT among cases and controls were systolic and diastolic blood pressure, FiO2, heart rate, applied PEEP, and respiratory rate. Conclusion: While some statistically significant physiologic effects were seen with CPT in mechanically ventilated patients, these were deemed to be small and clinically insignificant. This is consistent with prior research on less acutely ill COVID-19 patients.

Outcome of Indoor Covid Cases with Moderate to Severe Disease; Convalescent Plasma Transfusion vs Conventional Therapy

Objectives: Global COVID-19 epidemic has been therapeutic challenge. Convalescent plasma is observed to improve clinical outcomes. This research aims to study whether convalescent plasma therapy reduces the mortality and duration of hospitalization in moderate to severe Covid. Study Design and Setting: This interventional study was conducted after ethical approval at RIUT COVID-19 center from1stJune-30th Nov 2020. Methodology: Hundred Covid patients included; Total 100 hospitalized adult SARS Cov-2 PCR positive with moderate to severe disease who agreed for convalescent plasma transfusion were included. Fifty in plasma transfusion group and fifty in conventional therapy group. Those with contraindications for plasma transfusion, delayed presentation, indoor stay <5 days were excluded. Convalescent plasma was obtained from donors with prior documented SARS CoV-2 infection meeting donor eligibility criteria. 50 cases received convalescent plasma and50 received conventional therapy. Hospital stay and outcome documented. Results: Amongst 100 Covid cases; 44 females and 56 males; mean age 57.88+11.95 years, 74% had moderate covid and 26% severe. Fifty cases received conventional therapy for Covid and 50 received plasma transfusion. Both groups comparable for gender, age, smoking, obesity, and disease severity. Invasive ventilation administered in 25% and was associated with mortality (p=0.004). Mortality observed in 29 cases; 20(69%) in plasma transfusion group Vs. 09(31%) in conventional therapy group (p=0.015). The hospital stay was comparable between two groups The relative risk ratio was 2.22 with 95% CI (1.12-4.39). Conclusions: There was no therapeutic benefit in Covid patients treated with convalescent plasma as compared to conventional treatment

Efficacy and Safety of COVID-19 Treatment Using Convalescent Plasma Transfusion: Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

This study investigated the efficacy and safety of convalescent plasma (CP) transfusion against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) via a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A total of 5467 articles obtained from electronic databases were assessed; however, only 34 RCTs were eligible after manually screening and eliminating unnecessary studies. The beneficial effect was addressed by assessing the risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) of the meta-analysis. It was demonstrated that CP therapy is not effective in improving clinical outcomes, including reducing mortality with an RR of 0.88 [0.76; 1.03] (I2 = 68% and p = 0.10) and length of hospitalization with SMD of −0.47 [−0.95; 0.00] (I2 = 99% and p = 0.05). Subgroup analysis provided strong evidence that CP transfusion does not significantly reduce all-cause mortality compared to standard of care (SOC) with an RR of 1.01 [0.99; 1.03] (I2 = 70% and p = 0.33). In addition, CP was found to be safe for and well-tolerated by COVID-19 patients as was the SOC in healthcare settings. Overall, the results suggest that CP should not be applied outside of randomized trials because of less benefit in improving clinical outcomes for COVID-19 treatment.

Lessons learned from the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma at Kaiser Permanente.

BackgroundIn April 2020, the Mayo Clinic helped establish the US Food and Drug Administration Expanded Access Protocol for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) convalescent plasma (CCP). The effectiveness of CCP in the published literature is contradictory because some retrospective studies showed benefit in reducing mortality and severe illness, whereas prospective randomized controlled trials demonstrated no benefit of CCP.ObjectivesTo discuss (1) the implementation of CCP across Kaiser Permanente Southern California between April 2020 and April 2021, (2) retrospective multivariable analysis of 2,831 patients with COVID-19 who were transfused with CCP compared with 18,475 patients with COVID-19 who did not receive CCP, (3) how to reconcile contradictory published data regarding the efficacy of CCP, and (4) guidance regarding the future use of convalescent plasma in a large community hospital setting.MethodsMultivariable analysis was controlled for demographic characteristics, level of oxygen delivery, intensive care unit stay, selected laboratory findings, and other concurrent treatment-related variables. Tubing segments from 151 CCP units transfused between October 2020 and April 2021 were retrospectively tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) anti–spike protein receptor-binding domain IgG. Multivariable analysis showed that CCP transfusion did not affect mortality rates at 30 days and 5 months (odds ratio, 1.04, 95% CI, 0.87-1.25, and hazard ratio, 1.05, 95% CI, 0.93-1.19).ConclusionsIf convalescent plasma is offered as a therapeutic in a future viral pandemic, we recommend (1) transfusing only those patients who are negative for neutralizing antibodies, (2) transfusing very early during the disease course, (3) only using convalescent plasma with known levels of neutralizing antibodies, or (4) alternatively providing fractionated hyperimmune globulin.