SynthesisPloS one2022
Antifungal therapy in the management of fungal secondary infections in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of Patients with COVID-19 and Fungal Coinfections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Study.Iranian journal of pathology · 2024Review
- RecurrentJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- An observational study on factors associated with ICU mortality in Covid-19 patients and critical review of the literature.Scientific reports · 2023Review
- COVID-19 in patients with paracoccidioidomycosis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Review
- COVID-19 associated with cryptococcosis: a scoping review.Therapeutic advances in infectious diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe prevalence of fungal secondary infections among COVID-19 patients and efficacy of antifungal therapy used in such patients is still unknown. Hence, we conducted this study to find the prevalence of fungal secondary infections among COVID-19 patients and patient outcomes in terms of recovery or all-cause mortality following antifungal therapy (AFT) in such patients.
methodsWe performed a comprehensive literature search in PubMed®, Scopus®, Web of Sciences™, The Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrial.gov, MedRxiv.org, bioRxiv.org, and Google scholar to identify the literature that used antifungal therapy for the management fungal secondary infections in COVID-19 patients. We included case reports, case series, prospective & retrospective studies, and clinical trials. Mantel Haenszel random-effect model was used for estimating pooled risk ratio for required outcomes.
resultsA total of 33 case reports, 3 case series, and 21 cohort studies were selected for final data extraction and analysis. The prevalence of fungal secondary infections among COVID-19 patients was 28.2%. Azoles were the most commonly (65.1%) prescribed AFT. Study shows that high survival frequency among patients using AFT, received combination AFT and AFT used for >28 days. The meta-analysis showed, no significant difference in all-cause mortality between patients who received AFT and without AFT (p = 0.17), between types of AFT (p = 0.85) and the duration of AFT (p = 0.67).
conclusionThe prevalence of fungal secondary infections among COVID-19 patients was 28.2%. The survival frequency was high among patients who used AFT for fungal secondary infections, received combination AFT and AFT used for >28 days. However, meta-analysis results found that all-cause mortality in COVID-19 patients with fungal secondary infections is not significantly associated with type and duration of AFT, mostly due to presence of confounding factors such as small number of events, delay in diagnosis of fungal secondary infections, presence of other co-infections and multiple comorbidities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.