scholarly journals Colchicine treatment can improve outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19): A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timotius Ivan Hariyanto ◽  
Devina Adella Halim ◽  
Claudia Jodhinata ◽  
Theo Audi Yanto ◽  
Andree Kurniawan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Colchicine Treatment

scholarly journals Repurposing Colchicine in Treating Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Life ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 864
Author(s):  
Chi-Hone Lien ◽  
Ming-Dar Lee ◽  
Shun-Long Weng ◽  
Chao-Hsu Lin ◽  
Lawrence Yu-Min Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Colchicine Treatment ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Risk Of Mortality ◽  
Significant Difference

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had caused huge health losses worldwide. Several drugs had been applied to treat patients with COVID-19, and repurposing colchicine had been proposed for its anti-inflammatory properties via several pathways. In this systematic review, we evaluated the effects of colchicine treatment. From inception to May 31, 2021, databases, including PubMed, EMbase, medRxiv, and Research Square were searched, and 11 studies were enrolled. A total of 17,205 COVID-19 patients with male predominance (62.9%) were analyzed. Patients with colchicine treatment had a significantly lower risk of mortality (odds ratio (OR): 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38–0.87, I2: 72%; p < 0.01) and a non-significantly lower rate of mechanical ventilation (OR: 0.67, 95%CI: 0.39–1.15). The side effects were mild and not significantly different (OR: 2.03, 95%CI: 0.51–8.09). Subgroup analysis with randomized controlled trials showed no statistically significant difference in the mortality (OR: 0.80, 95%CI: 0.44–1.46, I2: 33%; p = 0.22). In conclusion, our meta-analysis found that colchicine treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality in patients with COVID-19. However, this benefit was not observed in the subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials. Further randomized controlled studies are required to confirm the potential benefits of colchicine treatment.

scholarly journals COLCHICINE TREATMENT IN SARS-COV-2 INFECTION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

CHEST Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 160 (4) ◽  
pp. A521
Author(s):  
Azizullah Beran Beran ◽  
Mohammed Mhanna ◽  
WAHOOD Waseem ◽  
Sami Ghazaleh ◽  
Omar Sajdeya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Colchicine Treatment

The effects of low-ratio n-6/n-3 PUFA on biomarkers of inflammation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yali Wei ◽  
Yan Meng ◽  
Na Li ◽  
Qian Wang ◽  
Liyong Chen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Fatty Acid ◽  
Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Chain Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid ◽  
Inflammation Markers ◽  
Pufa Supplementation ◽  
Long Chain

The purpose of the systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine if low-ratio n-6/n-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) supplementation affects serum inflammation markers based on current studies.

The association between dietary inflammatory index and risk of central obesity in adults: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 90 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 535-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahdieh Abbasalizad Farhangi ◽  
Mahdi Vajdi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Central Obesity ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Dietary Factors ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Inflammatory Status ◽  
Obesity Indices

Abstract. Backgrounds: Central obesity, as a pivotal component of metabolic syndrome is associated with numerous co-morbidities. Dietary factors influence central obesity by increased inflammatory status. However, recent studies didn’t evaluate the association between central obesity and dietary inflammation index (DII®) that give score to dietary factors according to their inflammatory potential. In the current systematic review and meta-analysis, we summarized the studies that investigated the association between DII® with central obesity indices in the general populations. Methods: In a systematic search from PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Sciences and Cochrane electronic databases, we collected relevant studies written in English and published until 30 October 2019. The population of included studies were apparently healthy subjects or individuals with obesity or obesity-related diseases. Observational studies that evaluated the association between DII® and indices of central obesity including WC or WHR were included. Results: Totally thirty-two studies were included; thirty studies were cross-sectional and two were cohort studies with 103071 participants. Meta-analysis of observational studies showed that higher DII® scores were associated with 1.81 cm increase in WC (Pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) = 1.813; CI: 0.785–2.841; p = 0.001). Also, a non-significant increase in the odds of having higher WC (OR = 1.162; CI: 0.95–1.43; p = 0.154) in the highest DII category was also observed. In subgroup analysis, the continent, dietary assessment tool and gender were the heterogeneity sources. Conclusion: The findings proposed that adherence to diets with high DII® scores was associated with increased WC. Further studies with interventional designs are necessary to elucidate the causality inference between DII® and central obesity indices.

Fear of pain and pain intensity: Meta-analysis and systematic review.

2020 ◽  
Vol 146 (5) ◽  
pp. 411-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Markfelder ◽  
Paul Pauli
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Fear Of Pain
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document