Use of convalescent plasma in patients with coronavirus disease (Covid-19): Systematic review and meta-analysis
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Objetives
To assess the effects of convalescent plasma treatment in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19).
Study design
Systematic review and Meta-analysis
Data sources
A systematic search was carried out on the L · OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19 until October 31, 2020
Study selection
Randomized clinical trials in which people with probable or confirmed COVID-19 were randomized to drug treatment, standard care, or placebo. Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles.
Methods
The PRISMA guidelines were followed for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2.0, and the certainty of the evidence using the recommendation assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach. For each outcome, the interventions were classified into groups, from most to least beneficial or harmful.
Results
We identified 10 RCTs (randomized controlled trials) involving 11854 patients in which convalescent plasma was compared with standard of care or other treatments. The results of five RCTs that evaluated the use of convalescent plasma in patients with COVID-19 did not show significant differences in the effect on mortality and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation.
Conclusions
Current evidence is insufficient to recommend the use of convalescent plasma in the treatment of moderate or severe COVID-19.
Contribution of the authors
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.02.14.20246454: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis Sample power: A sample size calculation was performed to determine whether the total number of patients included in the meta-analysis was less than the required number of patients to achieve sample power and to determine if the optimal information size (TOI) was met for a power 80%. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources The electronic databases PubMed, LiLacs, Cochrane Library and the clinicaltrials.gov register of clinical trials were also searched in duplicate. PubMedsuggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)Cochrane Librarysuggested…SciScore for 10.1101/2021.02.14.20246454: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis Sample power: A sample size calculation was performed to determine whether the total number of patients included in the meta-analysis was less than the required number of patients to achieve sample power and to determine if the optimal information size (TOI) was met for a power 80%. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources The electronic databases PubMed, LiLacs, Cochrane Library and the clinicaltrials.gov register of clinical trials were also searched in duplicate. PubMedsuggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)Cochrane Librarysuggested: (Cochrane Library, RRID:SCR_013000)We performed meta-analysis of direct comparisons and the rest of the calculations using the “meta” package in RStudio Version 1.3.1093.14. RStudiosuggested: (RStudio, RRID:SCR_000432)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
