Medical treatment of 55 patients with COVID-19 from seven cities in northeast China who fully recovered: a single-center, retrospective, observational study

Abstract

Background: COVID-19 is an emerging disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus; no specific medication has been identified to date. We aimed to investigate the administered medications and intervention times for patients who completely recovered from COVID-19. Methods: This single-center, retrospective, and observational study included 55 patients with COVID-19 who were transferred to Shenyang Sixth People's Hospital between January 20 and March 15, 2020. Demographic information, symptoms, laboratory indicators, treatment processes, and clinical outcomes were collected. Administered drugs and intervention times were compared in 47 and eight patients with mild and severe symptoms, respectively. Findings: All 55 patients recovered. Fifty-three patients (96·36%) received antiviral therapy, including 45 in the mild group (median treatment: 14 days; 17 received umifenovir) and all eight severe-group patients (median treatment: 17·5 days; four received lopinavir/ritonavir). Twenty-nine patients (52·72%) were administered antibiotics, including 21 in the mild group (median treatment: 13·5 days; 15 received moxifloxacin) and all eight in the severe group (median treatment: 9 days; two received linezolid). Moreover, seven patients (12·72%) were treated with glucocorticoids and nine (16·36%) with immunomodulators.

Comorbid diabetes and the risk of disease severity or death among 8807 COVID-19 patients in China: A meta-analysis

“…After evaluating 62 full-text articles for eligibility, 53 full-text articles were further excluded. Finally, 9 studies from different provinces/cities [6,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] were included in the meta-analysis (Fig. 1).…”

AGA Institute Rapid Review of the Gastrointestinal and Liver Manifestations of COVID-19, Meta-Analysis of International Data, and Recommendations for the Consultative Management of Patients with COVID-19

“…A total of 43 studies including 10,676 COVID-19 patients (confirmed by laboratory real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction [RT-PCR] testing) were included in the overall analysis. [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35]37,38,41,42,45,47,[49][50][51][52][53][54][55]58,59,[62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71]73,76 The pooled prevalence of diarrhea symptoms across these studies was 7.7% (95% CI, 7.2%-8.2%). When analyzing by country (studies from China vs studies from other countries), the pooled prevalence of diarrhea in studies from countries other than China was much higher at 18.3% (95% CI, 16.6%-20.1%).…”

“…In hospitalized patients, across 39 studies including 8,521 patients, the pooled prevalence was slightly higher at 10.4% (95% CI, 9.4%-10.7%) compared with outpatients. [20][21][22][23][25][26][27][28]30,[33][34][35]38,41,42,[44][45][46][49][50][51][52][53][54][55]60,[62][63][64][65][66][67][68][70][71][72][73][74]76 In 3 studies including 1701 outpatients, the pooled prevalence was 4.0% (95% CI, 3.1%-5.1%). 31,59,63 As part of the sensitivity analysis, we identified 35 studies including 9717 patients that described diarrhea, and explicitly reported that it was one of the initial presenting sympto ms. [20][21][22][23][26][...…”

JAK-Inhibitor and Type I Interferon Ability to Produce Favorable Clinical Outcomes in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…In addition, two studies consistently demonstrated opposite associations between Type I interferon therapy and clinical outcomes, [30,33] when comparing summary statistics and other included studies. [28,29,31,34,35] Heterogeneity among populations studied may play a role in the disparate individual results, as half of these studies were conducted in China, one was conducted in Iran, five were conducted in Western Europe, and one was conducted in Cuba. Other irreconcilable factors that may have influenced patient outcomes included individual study exclusion criterion, as well as the dosage and delivery method of the intervention.…”

“…Meta-analysis of 3 sets of studies with 990, 454, and 1480 patients receiving Type I interferon therapy revealed that there were no significant associations between receiving Type I interferon therapy, compared to standard of care, and ICU admittance, requiring mechanical ventilation, or developing a severe or critical case of COVID-19, respectively (p>0.05; Figure 3B; Figure 3C; Figure 3D). [28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36] The analyses included 97, 167, and 537 control patients, respectively. The data exhibited very high heterogeneity in cases of ICU admittance and disease severity (both I 2 >90%), but relatively low in the case of mechanical ventilation (I 2 =12%).…”