High-Dose or Low-Dose Corticosteroids - Which Regimen is More Effective in Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19? A Retrospective Study.

Alireza Kashefizadeh, Farbod Amiri, Laya Ohadi, Elham Keikha
{"title":"High-Dose or Low-Dose Corticosteroids - Which Regimen is More Effective in Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19? A Retrospective Study.","authors":"Alireza Kashefizadeh, Farbod Amiri, Laya Ohadi, Elham Keikha","doi":"10.26574/maedica.2024.19.2.330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although several studies have assessed corticosteroid therapy as a pivotal treatment for SARS-CoV-2, the net effectiveness of corticosteroids in the treatment of COVID-19 remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the conventional use of methylprednisolone and pulse therapy to determine the best method of administration of corticosteroids in patients with SARS-CoV-2.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 52 patients with a diagnosis of moderate to severe COVID-19 with the same conditions were retrospectively enrolled in the present study. Participants were divided into two groups based on the corticosteroid therapy regimen received during hospitalization: low-dose and high-dose methylprednisolone. Clinical outcomes, including laboratory tests, improvement of oxygen saturation, the need for invasive mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay (LOHS) and mortality, were compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The distribution of sex, age, oxygen saturation on admission, pattern and location of lung involvement, and other medical conditions were similar between the two groups to avoid the effect of any possible confounding factor. There were no differences in laboratory tests (P=0.389), LOHS (P=0.107), improvement of oxygen saturation (P=0.721), the need for invasive mechanical ventilation and mortality (P=0.695) between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on the results of this study, there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 between low- and high-dose corticosteroid regimens. Further research is warranted to determine the best method of administration of corticosteroids in these patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":74094,"journal":{"name":"Maedica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11345044/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maedica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26574/maedica.2024.19.2.330","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Although several studies have assessed corticosteroid therapy as a pivotal treatment for SARS-CoV-2, the net effectiveness of corticosteroids in the treatment of COVID-19 remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the conventional use of methylprednisolone and pulse therapy to determine the best method of administration of corticosteroids in patients with SARS-CoV-2.

Methods: A total of 52 patients with a diagnosis of moderate to severe COVID-19 with the same conditions were retrospectively enrolled in the present study. Participants were divided into two groups based on the corticosteroid therapy regimen received during hospitalization: low-dose and high-dose methylprednisolone. Clinical outcomes, including laboratory tests, improvement of oxygen saturation, the need for invasive mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay (LOHS) and mortality, were compared between the two groups.

Results: The distribution of sex, age, oxygen saturation on admission, pattern and location of lung involvement, and other medical conditions were similar between the two groups to avoid the effect of any possible confounding factor. There were no differences in laboratory tests (P=0.389), LOHS (P=0.107), improvement of oxygen saturation (P=0.721), the need for invasive mechanical ventilation and mortality (P=0.695) between groups.

Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 between low- and high-dose corticosteroid regimens. Further research is warranted to determine the best method of administration of corticosteroids in these patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大剂量或小剂量皮质类固醇--哪种方案对中度至重度 COVID-19 患者更有效?一项回顾性研究。
背景:尽管多项研究已将皮质类固醇疗法作为治疗SARS-CoV-2的关键疗法进行了评估,但皮质类固醇治疗COVID-19的净效果仍存在争议。本研究旨在比较甲基强的松龙和脉冲疗法的常规使用方法,以确定对 SARS-CoV-2 患者使用皮质类固醇的最佳方法:本研究回顾性地纳入了 52 名诊断为中度至重度 COVID-19 且病情相同的患者。根据住院期间接受的皮质类固醇治疗方案将参与者分为两组:小剂量和大剂量甲基强的松龙。比较了两组患者的临床结果,包括实验室检查、血氧饱和度改善情况、有创机械通气需求、住院时间(LOHS)和死亡率:两组患者的性别、年龄、入院时血氧饱和度、肺部受累模式和部位以及其他病症的分布情况相似,从而避免了任何可能的混杂因素的影响。两组患者在实验室检查(P=0.389)、LOHS(P=0.107)、血氧饱和度改善(P=0.721)、有创机械通气需求和死亡率(P=0.695)方面均无差异:根据本研究的结果,低剂量和高剂量皮质类固醇治疗方案对 COVID-19 患者的临床疗效无明显差异。有必要开展进一步研究,以确定这些患者使用皮质类固醇的最佳方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
High-Dose or Low-Dose Corticosteroids - Which Regimen is More Effective in Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19? A Retrospective Study. Histological Chorioamnionitis - Experience from a Tertiary Care Center. Impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on Waitlisted Preoperative General Surgical Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital in India - Problems and Probable Solutions: an Observational Study. Improvement of Mucoid Impaction with Dupilumab in a Severe Asthma Patient. Incidence of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) after COVID-19 Vaccination: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1