scholarly journals The effectiveness of high-dose intravenous vitamin C for patients with coronavirus disease 2019: A systematic review and Meta-analysis

Author(s):  
Sang Gyu Kwak ◽  
Yoo Jin Choo ◽  
Min Cheol Chang
2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Shuangdi Chen ◽  
Wenli Zhao ◽  
Binjie Zhang ◽  
Yijun Jia ◽  
Shihua Wu ◽  
...  

Objective. To comprehensively compare the effects of conventional therapy combined with intravenous vitamin C and conventional therapy on viral myocarditis in children through a meta-analysis. Methods. Relevant articles including clinical trials of normal treatment combined with intravenous vitamin C and conventional therapy for viral myocarditis in children that were published between January 2000 and February 2018 were selected from PubMed, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science and Technology Journal Database, and WANFANG database. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane systematic review method (version 5.1.0); data quality was evaluated by two independent researchers. The total effective rate; LDH, CK, and CK-MB levels; and other indicators were analyzed using Rev Man 5.3 software. Results. Eight studies were eligible for this meta-analysis, which included a total of 426 patients in the treatment group and 363 patients in the control group. The meta-analysis results of six studies showed that the total effective rate of intravenous vitamin C combined with conventional therapy was higher than that of conventional therapy alone [Z = 5.46, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.21 (1.13 to 1.30), P < 0.00001]; that of five studies showed that LDH levels were lower in children receiving intravenous vitamin C combined with conventional therapy than in those receiving conventional therapy alone [Z = 3.70, 95% CI: −1.88 (−2.88 to −0.88), P = 0.0002]; that of three studies showed that CK levels were lower in children receiving intravenous vitamin C combined with conventional therapy than in those receiving conventional therapy alone [Z = 4.21, 95% CI: −0.55 (−0.81 to −0.30), P < 0.0001]; that of four studies showed that CK-MB levels were lower in children receiving intravenous vitamin C combined with conventional therapy than in those receiving conventional therapy alone [Z = 13.64, 95% CI: −1.44 (−1.65 to −1.24), P < 0.00001]; that of two studies showed that CD3 levels were higher in children receiving intravenous vitamin C combined with conventional therapy than in those receiving conventional therapy alone [Z = 2.45, 95% CI: 0.41 (0.08–0.73), P = 0.01]; that of two studies showed no significant difference in changes in CD4 levels between children receiving intravenous vitamin C combined with conventional therapy and those receiving conventional therapy alone [Z = 0.28, 95% CI: −0.21 (−1.69 to 1.28), P = 0.78]; and that of two studies showed no significant difference in changes in CD4/CD8 between children receiving intravenous vitamin C combined with conventional therapy and those receiving conventional therapy alone [Z = 0.07, 95% CI: −0.03 (−0.73 to 0.67), P = 0.94]. Conclusion. The meta-analysis results showed that intravenous vitamin C combined with conventional therapy is better than the simple, conventional therapy for the treatment of viral myocarditis in children in terms of the total effective rate and LDH, CK, and CK-MB levels.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cong-Cong Zhao ◽  
Li-Nan Han ◽  
Gui-Jun Zhu ◽  
Zhi-Qiang Li ◽  
Zhen-Jie Hu

Abstract Background: The effect of vitamin C on outcomes in sepsis is unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis included animal and human studies to evaluate the value of intravenous vitamin C as a monotherapy in sepsis. Methods: We searched MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL and CBM for animal studies, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and quasi-RCTs dated up to August 10, 2020. The included studies compared the effect of intravenous vitamin C and control on outcomes in sepsis. No language restrictions were applied. Two authors independently assessed the eligibility and quality of the trials and extracted data. Results: A total of 7 animal studies and 5 RCTs were included. Four animal studies (n=176) and all 5 RCTs (n=472) reported mortality, the primary outcome of this meta-analysis. The mortality of the vitamin C group was lower than that of the control group (odds ratio (OR) 0.22, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.81, P = 0.02; I2 =60% in animal studies, and OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.71, P < 0.001; I2 =0% in human studies). The GRADE assessment showed that the outcome was downgraded from high- to moderate-quality evidence due to imprecision. With regard to the secondary outcomes, the pooled data from animal studies showed that vitamin C had a beneficial effect on mean arterial pressure (std. mean difference (SMD) 1.36, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.41, P = 0.01; I2 =78%) and capillary density (SMD 1.97, 95% CI 0.89 to 3.04, P=0.69; I2 =0%) but had no effect on the level of lactate. The pooled data from human studies showed that vitamin C was associated with a reduction in vasopressor duration (MD -18.85, 95% CI -24.61 to -11.55, P < 0.001; I2 =0%) but could not shorten the length of ICU stay or duration of mechanical ventilation. No adverse effects were reported.Conclusions: Evidence from animal and human studies suggests that intravenous vitamin C monotherapy can reduce mortality in sepsis, with a moderate quality of evidence. We also found that vitamin C had a beneficial effect on mean arterial pressure, capillary density, and reduction of vasopressor duration in sepsis.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e033458 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomoko Fujii ◽  
Alessandro Belletti ◽  
Anitra Carr ◽  
Toshi A Furukawa ◽  
Nora Luethi ◽  
...  

IntroductionVasoplegia is common and associated with a poor prognosis in patients with sepsis and septic shock. Vitamin C therapy in combination with vitamin B1 and glucocorticoid, as well as monotherapy in various doses, has been investigated as a treatment for the vasoplegic state in sepsis, through targeting the inflammatory cascade. However, the combination effect and the relative contribution of each drug have not been well evaluated. Furthermore, the best combination between the three agents is currently unknown. We are planning a systematic review (SR) with network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the different treatments and identify the combination with the most favourable effect on survival.Methods and analysisWe will include all randomised controlled trials comparing any intervention using intravenous vitamin C, vitamin B1 and/or glucocorticoid with another or with placebo in the treatment of sepsis. We are interested in comparing the following active interventions. Very high-dose vitamin C (≥12 g/day), high-dose vitamin C (≥6 g/day), vitamin C (<6 g/day); low-dose glucocorticoid (<400 mg/day of hydrocortisone (or equivalent)), vitamin B1 and combinations of the drugs above. The primary outcome will be all-cause mortality at the longest follow-up within 1 year but 90 days or longer postrandomisation. All relevant studies will be sought through database searches and trial registries. All reference selection and data extraction will be conducted by two independent reviewers. We will conduct a random-effects NMA to synthesise all evidence for each outcome and obtain a comprehensive ranking of all treatments. We will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks to rank the various interventions. To differentiate between the effect of combination therapies and the effect of a component, we will employ a component NMA.Ethics and disseminationThis SR does not require ethical approval. We will publish findings from this systematic review in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and present these at scientific conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018103860.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. e31-e31
Author(s):  
Sadeq Hosseinpour ◽  
Nasrin Moradi ◽  
Reyhane Izadi ◽  
Shahrzad Shadabi ◽  
Raheleh Behzadi ◽  
...  

Introduction: The rapid worldwide spread of COVID-19 has caused a global health crisis. Unfortunately, no vaccine or special antiviral drug has been developed against COVID-19 to date, symptomatic supportive care has been the most common treatment. Objectives: the purpose of this systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous, and continuously updated summary of the available evidence on the role of vitamin C in treating patients with COVID-19. Methods: In this review, we identified studies published in 2020 that describe on the relationship between COVID-19 and vitamin C. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Magiran, SID and Web of Science for research articles published up to 23 December 2020 using the keywords of vitamin C, COVID-19, SARS-COV-2 and coronavirus 2. Results: At the initial stage of screening, 181articles were excluded after reviewing the title and removing irrelevant and duplicate titles, 52 articles were selected to review the abstract. After reviewing the abstract (or in articles without abstracts after reviewing the original text), nine articles were finally considered suitable for this purpose and were reviewed and finalized. Vitamin C is a pivotal component of the immune system, with proven antioxidant, cytokine storm suppressor and anti-inflammatory properties and has been tested in numerous studies for its role in severe sepsis and ICU care, especially when used as a continuous high-dose intravenous infusion. In addition, some studies indicated high-dose intravenous vitamin C treatment was associated with fewer days on mechanical ventilation, shorter ICU stay, and earlier recovery compared to the average length of mechanical ventilation, disease duration, and ICU stay in critical COVID-19 patients. Conclusion: Vitamin C can significantly improve clinical symptoms, inflammatory response, immune and organ function in COVID-19 patients. In patients affected with COVID-19, high-dose intravenous vitamin C is expected to improve pulmonary function and reduce mortality for patients with COVID-19 and can be beneficial in aspects of inflammatory response, immune and organ function for aggravation of COVID-19 patients, however further clinical trials are necessary.


Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 3910
Author(s):  
Aileen Hill ◽  
Kai Clasen ◽  
Sebastian Wendt ◽  
Ádám Majoros ◽  
Christian Stoppe ◽  
...  

The authors thank the readers for pointing out the issues [...]


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Shu Wang ◽  
Xiang Li ◽  
Yue Yang ◽  
Jingping Xie ◽  
Mingyue Liu ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective: We aimed to evaluate the association between coffee and/or tea consumption and breast cancer (BC) risk among premenopausal and postmenopausal women and to conduct a network meta-analysis. Design: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Setting: We conducted a systematic review of electronic publications in the last 30 years to identify case–control studies or prospective cohort studies that evaluated the effects of coffee and tea intake. Results: Forty-five studies that included more than 3 323 288 participants were eligible for analysis. Network meta-analysis was performed to determine the effects of coffee and/or tea consumption on reducing BC risk in a dose-dependent manner and differences in coffee/tea type, menopause status, hormone receptor and the BMI in subgroup and meta-regression analyses. According to the first pairwise meta-analysis, low-dose coffee intake and high-dose tea intake may exhibit efficacy in preventing ER(estrogen receptor)− BC, particularly in postmenopausal women. Then, we performed another pairwise and network meta-analysis and determined that the recommended daily doses were 2–3 cups/d of coffee or ≥5 cups/d of tea, which contained a high concentration of caffeine, particularly in postmenopausal women. Conclusions: Coffee and tea consumption is not associated with a reduction in the overall BC risk in postmenopausal women and is associated with a potentially lower risk of ER− BC. And the highest recommended dose is 2–3 cups of coffee/d or ≥5 cups of tea/d. They are potentially useful dietary protectants for preventing BC.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document