Clinical outcome in solid organ transplant recipients affected by COVID-19 compared to general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

A significant increased risk of complications and mortality in immunocompromised patients affected by COVID-19 has been described. However, the impact of COVID-19 in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients is an issue still under debate, due to conflicting evidence that has emerged from different observational studies. We performed a systematic review with a meta-analysis to assess the clinical outcome in SOT recipients with COVID-19 compared with the general population. PubMed-MEDLINE and Scopus were independently searched until 13 October 2021. Prospective or retrospective observational studies comparing clinical outcome in SOT recipients versus general populations affected by COVID-19 were included. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Participants were patients with confirmed COVID-19. Interventions reviewed were SOTs. The quality of the included studies was independently assessed with the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool for observational studies. The meta-analysis was performed by pooling ORs retrieved from studies providing adjustment for confounders using a random-effects model with the inverse variance method. Multiple subgroups and sensitivity analyses were conducted to investigate the source of heterogeneity. A total of 3501 articles were screened, and 31 observational studies (N = 590 375; 5759 SOT recipients vs. 584 616 general population) were included in the meta-analyses. No difference in 30-day mortality rate was found in the primary analysis, including studies providing adjustment for confounders (N = 17; 3752 SOT recipients vs. 159 745 general population; OR: 1.13; 95% CI, 0.94-1.35; I2 = 33.9%). No evidence of publication bias was reported. A higher risk of intensive care unit admission (OR: 1.56; 95% CI, 1.03-2.63) and occurrence of acute kidney injury (OR: 2.50; 95% CI, 1.81-3.45) was found in SOT recipients. No increased risk in mortality was found in SOT recipients affected by COVID-19 compared with the general population when adjusted for demographic and clinical features and COVID-19 severity

Sputum completion and conversion rates after intensive phase of tuberculosis treatment: an assessment of the Rwandan control program

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In Rwanda tuberculosis (TB) is one of the major health problems. To contribute to an improved performance of the Rwandan National TB Control Program, we conducted a study with the following objectives: (1) to assess the completion rate of sputum smear examinations at the end of the intensive phase of TB treatment; (2) to assess the sputum conversion rate (SCR); (3) to assess associations between smear completion rate or SCR with key health facility characteristics.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>TB registers in 89 health facilities in five provinces were reviewed. Data of new and retreatment smear-positive pulmonary TB (PTB+) cases registered between January and June 2006 were included in the study. Data on key characteristics of the selected health facilities were also collected.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Among 1509 new PTB + cases, 32 (2.1%) had died by 2 months, and 178 (11.8%) had been transferred-out. Among the remaining 1299 patients, a smear examination at month 2 was done in 1039 (smear completion rate 80.0%). Among these 1039, 852 (82.0%) had become smear-negative. The smear completion rate and SCR varied considerably between health facilities. A high number of new PTB cases at a health facility was the only significant predictor of a low completion rate, while the only independent factor associated with low sputum conversion rates was rural (vs. urban) location of the health facility.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In Rwanda, too few patients get a smear examination after 2 months of TB treatment; the SCR among those with smear results was adequate at 82%. A high number of new TB patients at a health facility was a significant predictor of a low completion rate. The national TB control program should design strategies to improve completion rates.</p

Repeated seasonal influenza vaccination among elderly in Europe: Effects on laboratory confirmed hospitalised influenza

In Europe, annual influenza vaccination is recommended to elderly. From 2011 to 2014 and in 2015-16, we conducted a multicentre test negative case control study in hospitals of 11 European countries to measure influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against laboratory confirmed hospitalised influenza among people aged ≥65years. We pooled four seasons data to measure IVE by past exposures to influenza vaccination. We swabbed patients admitted for clinical conditions related to influenza with onset of severe acute respiratory infection ≤7days before admission. Cases were patients RT-PCR positive for influenza virus and controls those negative for any influenza virus. We documented seasonal vaccination status for the current season and the two previous seasons. We recruited 5295 patients over the four seasons, including 465A(H1N1)pdm09, 642A(H3N2), 278 B case-patients and 3910 controls. Among patients unvaccinated in both previous two seasons, current seasonal IVE (pooled across seasons) was 30% (95%CI: -35 to 64), 8% (95%CI: -94 to 56) and 33% (95%CI: -43 to 68) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B respectively. Among patients vaccinated in both previous seasons, current seasonal IVE (pooled across seasons) was -1% (95%CI: -80 to 43), 37% (95%CI: 7-57) and 43% (95%CI: 1-68) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B respectively. Our results suggest that, regardless of patients' recent vaccination history, current seasonal vaccine conferred some protection to vaccinated patients against hospitalisation with influenza A(H3N2) and B. Vaccination of patients already vaccinated in both the past two seasons did not seem to be effective against A(H1N1)pdm09. To better understand the effect of repeated vaccination, engaging in large cohort studies documenting exposures to vaccine and natural infection is needed