Efficacy and safety of antibiotic agents in children with COVID-19: a rapid review

Factors Associated with the Antibiotic Treatment of Children Hospitalized for COVID-19 during the Lockdown in Serbia

Unselective use of antibiotics to treat children with COVID-19 is one of the major issues during the pandemic in Serbia. Thus far, there has been no evidence about the predictors of multiple antibiotic use in the treatment of children with COVID-19. The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence of antibiotic use, as well as to examine demographic and clinical factors associated with a greater number of antibiotics and with a longer antibiotic treatment administered to hospitalized children with COVID-19 during the lockdown in Serbia. This study included all children who were hospitalized from 6 March to 31 May 2020 at the only pediatric COVID-19 hospital, and who were confirmed to have SARS-CoV-2 infection. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected from medical records. The antibiotic treatment included the use of azithromycin, cephalosporin (ceftriaxone), ampicillin-amikacin, and hydroxychloroquine. The overall prevalence of antibiotics use in children hospitalized with COVID-19 regardless of age was 47.2% (43.3% in children aged 1-5 years and 44.4% in those aged 5-17 years). In children aged 1-5 years, not having a family member affected by COVID-19 (B = -1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.43, -0.34, p = 0.011), having pneumonia on chest X-ray (B = 0.81, 95%CI 0.34, 1.29, p = 0.002), being a boy (B = -0.65, 95%CI -1.17, -0.13, p = 0.018), and having higher C-reactive protein (CRP) values on admission (B = 0.12, 95%CI 0.07, 0.17, p = 0.001) were associated with the administration of a higher number of antibiotics. These factors, along with having fever (B = 3.20, 95%CI 1.03, 5.37, p = 0.006), were associated with a longer duration of antibiotic treatment in children aged 1-5 years. In children aged 5-17 years, having pharyngeal erythema (B = 1.37, 95%CI 0.61, 2.13, p = 0.001), fever (B = 0.43, 95%CI 0.07, 0.79, p = 0.018), and pneumonia on chest X-ray (B = 0.91, 95%CI 0.53, 1.29, p = 0.001), not having rhinorrhea (B = -1.27, 95%CI -2.47, -0.08, p = 0.037), being a girl (B = 0.52, 95%CI 0.08, 0.97, p = 0.021), and having higher CRP values on admission (B = 0.04, 95%CI 0.01, 0.06, p = 0.006) were associated with the administration of a higher number of antibiotics. These factors, not including the absence of rhinorrhea, were associated with a longer duration of antibiotics treatment in children aged 5-17 years. Demographic, epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory parameters were associated with the use of multiple antibiotics and a longer duration of antibiotic treatment both among children aged 1-5 years and those aged 5-17 years.

Decreased survival in children inpatients with COVID-19 and antibiotic prescription

Background

The empirical prescription of antibiotics to inpatients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is frequent despite uncommon bacterial coinfections. Current knowledge of the effect of antibiotics on the survival of hospitalized children with COVID-19 is limited.

Objective

To characterize the survival experience of children with laboratory-positive COVID-19 in whom antibiotics were prescribed at hospital admission.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in Mexico, with children hospitalized due to COVID-19 from March 2020 to December 2021. Data from 1601 patients were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method and the log-rank test. We computed hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to evaluate the effect of the analyzed exposures on disease outcomes.

Results

Antibiotics were prescribed to 13.2% (\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$n$$\end{document}n = 211) of enrolled children and a higher mortality rate [14.9 (95% CI 10.1–19.8) vs. 8.3 (95% CI 6.8–9.8)] per 1000 person-days, \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$p$$\end{document}p < 0.001) was found among them. At any given cut-off, survival functions were lower in antibiotic-positive inpatients (\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$p$$\end{document}p < 0.001). In the multiple model, antibiotic prescription was associated with a 50% increase in the risk of fatal outcome (HR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.01–2.22). A longer interval between illness onset and healthcare-seeking and pneumonia at hospital admission was associated with a poorer prognosis.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that antibiotic prescription in children hospitalized due to COVID-19 is associated with decreased survival. If later replicated, these findings highlight the need for rational antibiotics in these patients.

Methodology and experiences of rapid advice guideline development for children with COVID-19: responding to the COVID-19 outbreak quickly and efficiently

Background

Rapid Advice Guidelines (RAG) provide decision makers with guidance to respond to public health emergencies by developing evidence-based recommendations in a short period of time with a scientific and standardized approach. However, the experience from the development process of a RAG has so far not been systematically summarized. Therefore, our working group will take the experience of the development of the RAG for children with COVID-19 as an example to systematically explore the methodology, advantages, and challenges in the development of the RAG. We shall propose suggestions and reflections for future research, in order to provide a more detailed reference for future development of RAGs.

Result

The development of the RAG by a group of 67 researchers from 11 countries took 50 days from the official commencement of the work (January 28, 2020) to submission (March 17, 2020). A total of 21 meetings were held with a total duration of 48 h (average 2.3 h per meeting) and an average of 16.5 participants attending. Only two of the ten recommendations were fully supported by direct evidence for COVID-19, three recommendations were supported by indirect evidence only, and the proportion of COVID-19 studies among the body of evidence in the remaining five recommendations ranged between 10 and 83%. Six of the ten recommendations used COVID-19 preprints as evidence support, and up to 50% of the studies with direct evidence on COVID-19 were preprints.

Conclusions

In order to respond to public health emergencies, the development of RAG also requires a clear and transparent formulation process, usually using a large amount of indirect and non-peer-reviewed evidence to support the formation of recommendations. Strict following of the WHO RAG handbook does not only enhance the transparency and clarity of the guideline, but also can speed up the guideline development process, thereby saving time and labor costs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01545-5.

SARS-COV-2 - the pandemic of the XXI century, clinical manifestations - neurological implications

In December 2019, in Wuhan, China, the first cases of infection with SARS-CoV 2 responsible for COVID-19 disease were identified. SARS-CoV 2 was declared a pandemic on March 11, 2020, and since then has attracted the medical world's attention. The threat to humans' health that this emerging pandemic could leave raises awareness on the importance of understanding the mechanisms that underlie the developing conditions. The epidemiology, clinical picture, and pathogenesis of COVID-19 show that this virus presents new strategies to overcome the past defensive medicine. While all the current data has focused on the pulmonary and cardiovascular manifestations, little has been written about the neurological implications of the disease. This review updates new clinical aspects that SARS-CoV 2 expresses in humans by focusing primarily on neurological manifestations. The damage to the nervous system became more apparent - anosmia, ageusia, polyneuritis, meningitis, meningoencephalitis, stroke, acute necrotizing encephalopathy. Oxygen therapy is vital for those in critical health situations. Finally, prevention is the most important element in breaking the epidemiological chain.

Drugs and liver injury: a not to be overlooked binomial in COVID-19

SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) results predominantly in pulmonary involvement but a direct, virus-induced liver damage may also occur, whose mechanisms are being actively investigated. Accordingly, it appears of utmost importance to monitor liver function and carefully evaluate hepatic safety of the various drugs administered during COVID-19. In this respect, many drugs, biological agents and novel molecules, whose efficacy in COVID-19 is under scrutiny, have also been shown to potentially cause or worsen liver damage. In this article, we review safety data of established as well as promising agents for COVID-19.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Children

Since its appearance in Wuhan in mid-December 2019, acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) related 19 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has spread dramatically worldwide. It soon became apparent that the incidence of pediatric COVID-19 was much lower than the adult form. Morbidity in children is characterized by a variable clinical presentation and course. Symptoms are similar to those of other acute respiratory viral infections, the upper airways being more affected than the lower airways. Thus far, over 90% of children who tested positive for the virus presented mild or moderate symptoms and signs. Most children were asymptomatic, and only a few cases were severe, unlike in the adult population. Deaths have been rare and occurred mainly in children with underlying morbidity. Factors as reduced angiotensin-converting enzyme receptor expression, increased activation of the interferon-related innate immune response, and trained immunity have been implicated in the relative resistance to COVID-19 in children, however the underlying pathogenesis and mechanism of action remain to be established. While at the pandemic outbreak, mild respiratory manifestations were the most frequently described symptoms in children, subsequent reports suggested that the clinical course of COVID-19 is more complex than initially thought. Thanks to the experience acquired in adults, the diagnosis of pediatric SARS-CoV-2 infection has improved with time. Data on the treatment of children are sparse, however, several antiviral trials are ongoing. The purpose of this narrative review is to summarize current understanding of pediatric SARS-CoV-2 infection and provide more accurate information for healthcare workers and improve the care of patients.

An Examination of COVID-19 Medications' Effectiveness in Managing and Treating COVID-19 Patients: A Comparative Review

Background: The review seeks to shed light on the administered and recommended COVID-19 treatment medications through an evaluation of their efficacy. Methods: Data were collected from key databases, including Scopus, Medline, Google Scholar, and CINAHL. Other platforms included WHO and FDA publications. The review's literature search was guided by the WHO solidarity clinical trials for COVID-19 scope and trial-assessment parameters. Results: The findings indicate that the use of antiretroviral drugs as an early treatment for COVID-19 patients has been useful. It has reduced hospital time, hastened the clinical cure period, delayed and reduced the need for mechanical and invasive ventilation, and reduced mortality rates. The use of vitamins, minerals, and supplements has been linked to increased immunity and thus offering the body a fighting chance. Nevertheless, antibiotics do not correlate with improving patients' wellbeing and are highly discouraged from the developed clinical trials. Conclusions: The review demonstrates the need for additional clinical trials with a randomized, extensive sample base and over a more extended period to examine the potential side effects of the medications administered. Critically, the findings underscore the need for vaccination as the only viable medication to limit the SARS-CoV-2 virus spread.

SARS-CoV-2 microbiome dysbiosis linked disorders and possible probiotics role

In December 2019, a pneumonia outbreak of unknown etiology was reported which caused panic in Wuhan city of central China, which was later identified as Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by a novel coronavirus, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and WHO. To date, the SARS-CoV-2 spread has already become a global pandemic with a considerable death toll. The associated symptoms of the COVID-19 infection varied with increased inflammation as an everyday pathological basis. Among various other symptoms such as fever, cough, lethargy, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms included diarrhea and IBD with colitis, have been reported. Currently, there is no sole cure for COVID-19, and researchers are actively engaged to search out appropriate treatment and develop a vaccine for its prevention. Antiviral for controlling viral load and corticosteroid therapy for reducing inflammation seems to be inadequate to control the fatality rate. Based on the available related literature, which documented GI symptoms with diarrhea, inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) with colitis, and increased deaths in the intensive care unit (ICU), conclude that dysbiosis occurs during SARS-COV-2 infection as the gut-lung axis cannot be ignored. As probiotics play a therapeutic role for GI, IBD, colitis, and even in viral infection. So, we assume that the inclusion of studies to investigate gut microbiome and subsequent therapies such as probiotics might help decrease the inflammatory response of viral pathogenesis and respiratory symptoms by strengthening the host immune system, amelioration of gut microbiome, and improvement of gut barrier function.

Secondary Bacterial Infections in Patients With Viral Pneumonia

Pulmonary diseases of viral origin are often followed by the manifestation of secondary infections, leading to further clinical complications and negative disease outcomes. Thus, research on secondary infections is essential. Here, we review clinical data of secondary bacterial infections developed after the onset of pulmonary viral infections. We review the most recent clinical data and current knowledge of secondary bacterial infections and their treatment in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients; case reports from SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV2 and the best-studied respiratory virus, influenza, are described. We outline treatments used or prophylactic measures employed for secondary bacterial infections. This evaluation includes recent clinical reports of pulmonary viral infections, including those by COVID-19, that reference secondary infections. Where data was provided for COVID-19 patients, a mortality rate of 15.2% due to secondary bacterial infections was observed for patients with pneumonia (41 of 268). Most clinicians treated patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections with prophylactic antibiotics (63.7%, n = 1,901), compared to 73.5% (n = 3,072) in all clinical reports of viral pneumonia included in this review. For all cases of viral pneumonia, a mortality rate of 10.9% due to secondary infections was observed (53 of 482). Most commonly, quinolones, cephalosporins and macrolides were administered, but also the glycopeptide vancomycin. Several bacterial pathogens appear to be prevalent as causative agents of secondary infections, including antibiotic-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus and Klebsiella pneumoniae.

Therapeutic interventions for COVID-19: a living overview of reviews

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread worldwide, but safe and effective treatment options remain unavailable. Numerous systematic reviews of varying qualities have tried to summarize the evidence on the available therapeutic interventions for COVID-19. This overview of reviews aims to provide a succinct summary of the findings of systematic reviews on different pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic interventions for COVID-19.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and WHO database of publications on COVID-19 from 1 December 2019 through to 11 June 2020 for peer-reviewed systematic review studies that reported on potential pharmacological or non-pharmacological therapies for COVID-19. Quality assessment was completed using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) measure.

RESULTS

Out of 816 non-duplicate studies, 45 were included in the overview. Antiviral and antibiotic agents, corticosteroids, and anti-malarial agents were the most common drug classes used to treat COVID-19; however, there was no direct or strong evidence to support their efficacy. Oxygen therapy and ventilatory support was the most common non-pharmacological supportive care. The quality of most of the included reviews was rated as low or critically low.

CONCLUSION

This overview of reviews demonstrates that although some therapeutic interventions may be beneficial to specific subgroups of COVID-19 patients, the available data are insufficient to strongly recommend any particular treatment option to be used at a population level. Future systematic reviews on COVID-19 treatments should adhere to the recommended systematic review methodologies and ensure that promptness and comprehensiveness are balanced.The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.