Journal
JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 207, Issue 4, Pages 553-563Publisher
OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jis726
Keywords
neuraminidase inhibitors; mortality; critical care admission; pneumonia; systematic review; meta-analysis
Categories
Funding
- F. Hoffmann-La Roche
- GlaxoSmithKline
- Astra Zeneca
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Background. The impact of neuraminidase inhibitor (NAI) treatment on clinical outcomes of public health importance during the 2009-2010 pandemic has not been firmly established. Methods. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching 11 databases (2009 through April 2012) for relevant studies. We used standard methods conforming to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using random effects models. Results. Regarding mortality we observed a nonsignificant reduction associated with NAI treatment (at any time) versus none (OR, 0.72 [95% CI, .51-1.01]). However we observed significant reductions for early treatment (<= 48 hours after symptom onset) versus late (OR, 0.38 [95% CI, .27-.53]) and for early treatment versus none (OR, 0.35 [95% CI, .18-.71]). NAI treatment (at any time) versus none was associated with an elevated risk of severe outcome (OR, 1.76 [95% CI, 1.22-2.54]), but early versus late treatment reduced the likelihood (OR, 0.41 [95% CI, .30-.56]). Conclusions. During the 2009-2010 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic, early initiation of NAI treatment reduced the likelihood of severe outcomes compared with late or no treatment. PROSPERO Registration. CRD42011001273.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available