Use of convalescent plasma in the treatment of Covid-19: A systematic review

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24862/cco.v15i4.1316

Abstract

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has become an emergency in worldwide public health presenting high transmissibility and a lot of deaths. Moreover, it’s an illness with few therapy options. One of them is the convalescent plasma, a procedure with high therapeutic potential, whose systematic reviews on its uses in treating the disease are, however, scarce. Objective: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of this treatment in COVID-19. Methodology: A systematic review about the use of the convalescent plasma in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 was carried out based on data platforms Pubmed and Scielo. Results: Thirteen articles were analyzed, eight of which being case series, four of which case reports and one randomized clinical trial. The studies demonstrated that convalescent plasma can be a possible component of the therapy arsenal for the treatment of COVID-19, having few or none adverse effect. However, not only did the majority of the studies analyze the plasma in association with other drugs, which can confuse the estimative of its isolated effect, but also the number of studied patients was small and a selection bias is present. Furthermore, the dosage, the number of applications and the pattern of improvement in each study were variable. Conclusion: Although some papers point out the therapeutic safety as well as some benefits of convalescent plasma, there are confusing factors that don't allow a definite analysis of its efficiency. To the standardization and recommendation of its usage, more clinical studies are necessary, preferably randomized clinical trials.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2021-03-02

How to Cite

Macedo, G. D., Reis, L. P., Cardoso, J. G. F., Silva, I. Ávila C. da, & Moura, A. S. (2021). Use of convalescent plasma in the treatment of Covid-19: A systematic review. Conexão Ciência Online, 15(4), 70–79. https://doi.org/10.24862/cco.v15i4.1316

Issue

Section

Review