Convalescent plasma for coronavirus disease 2019 in pregnancy: a case report and review

COVID-19 and Pregnancy

It is of greatest concern how COVID-19 is affecting pregnancy, mothers, and babies. Scientists are studying the impact of COVID-19 on pregnant women and babies and are understanding a little more every day. Reports show that there is an increased risk in pregnant women compared to nonpregnant women to get more serious illness due to COVID-19. Researchers are also investigating COVID-19 and its potential impact on a fetus. There are exceedingly rare cases of COVID-19 transmission to the fetus, and newborns can pick up COVID-19 when exposed. Vaccines are proved to be safe for pregnant women and help prevent both mother and the fetus from getting COVID-19 and are also highly effective to prevent COVID-19 infection, critical sickness, and fatalities in general. There are specific guidelines for labor and delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic which are to be imposed and followed to achieve safer and healthier childbirth. In this article, the overall influence of COVID-19 in pregnancy, its pathophysiology, effects on placenta and neonates, maternal and perinatal features and outcomes, the role of vaccination, available treatment options, and the guidelines to be followed during the pandemic are discussed based on the available scientific evidence.

The use of convalescent plasma therapy in the management of a pregnant woman with COVID-19: a case report

The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is responsible for the current worldwide pandemic. Treatment and prophylaxis are still under investigation. Convalescent plasma therapy could be an alternative. We report a case of a 41-year-old patient, at 28 weeks of gestation, was hospitalized with COVID-19. On the 10^th day after onset of symptoms, the clinical picture worsened, and she required high-flow oxygen therapy (30L/minute), with 92% oxygen saturation, and chest X-ray showing mild bilateral opacities at lung bases. Blood tests showed D-dimer 1,004ng/mL, C-reactive protein 81mg/L, pro-calcitonin 0.05ng/mL and interleukine-6 42.9pg/mL. The therapy chosen was Tazocin^® 12g/day, vancomycin 2g/day, and methylprednisolone 40mg/day. In addition, convalescent plasma therapy was administered (275mL) uneventfully, including SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and neutralizing antibodies >1:160. The patient had a fast recovery. The early administration of convalescent plasma, with high titers of neutralizing antibodies, may be an alternative option for severe COVID-19 during pregnancy, until further studies demonstrate an efficient and safe treatment or prophylaxis.

Successful management of a pregnant woman with COVID-19 and multiple severe complications

We report a case of a 36-year-old gravida 2 para 1 woman at 38 weeks of gestation. A caesarean section was performed for severe pre-eclampsia, intrauterine growth restriction and oligohydramnios. The patient suffered postoperative bleeding, and exploratory laparotomy was performed. Uterine atonia, Couvelaire uterus and left adnexal haematoma were found, requiring a supracervical hysterectomy. As COVID-19 pneumonia and superimposed bacterial infection developed, the patient was mechanically ventilated in the intensive care unit. Remdesivir and meropenem were initially administered, but were changed to levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin following antibiotic sensitivity tests. Blood culture grew Enterococcus galinarum. Meanwhile, bleeding of the incisional wound occurred, which was controlled by the cessation of heparin therapy and regular wound care. With intensive monitoring and multidisciplinary management, the patient’s condition improved, and she was discharged from the hospital on day 25 from admission.

Convalescent Plasma for Pregnant Women with COVID-19: A Systematic Literature Review

The treatment of COVID-19 is particularly critical in pregnant women, considering the potential teratogenic effects of antiviral agents and the immune-depression related with pregnancy. The aim of this review is to systematically examine the current evidence on the clinical use of convalescent plasma during pregnancy. The electronic databases Medline PubMed Advanced Search Builder, Scopus, Web Of Science and Google Scholar were searched (until 1 January 2021). Inclusion criteria were pregnant women with COVID-19 (or SARS-CoV-2 infection), in whom convalescent plasma (or hyperimmune plasma) was used as treatment. We searched clinical trial registries (censored 5 January 2021) for eligible studies under way. After elimination of duplications, the initial search yielded 79 potentially relevant records, of which 67 were subsequently excluded. The 12 remaining records were case reports involving 12 pregnancies. Six of the mothers were reported to be well, two were reported to have preeclampsia, and in one case each the maternal outcome was described as survival, clinical improvement, discharged with oxygen and rehabilitation. With regard to the neonates, two were declared to be well, four had transient morbidity, two were critically ill and one died; normal ongoing pregnancies, but no post-delivery information, were reported for the remaining three cases. Clinical trials under way or planned to investigate the use of convalescent plasma for COVID-19 during pregnancy are lacking. This is the first systematic review of the literature regarding the treatment of COVID-19 in pregnancy. The published literature data seem to indicate that convalescent plasma administered to pregnant women with severe COVID-19 provides benefits for both the mother and the fetus. The quality of the available studies is, however, very limited since they are all case reports and thus suffer from relevant reporting bias.

Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review

BACKGROUND

Convalescent plasma and hyperimmune immunoglobulin may reduce mortality in patients with viral respiratory diseases, and are being investigated as potential therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A thorough understanding of the current body of evidence regarding benefits and risks of these interventions is required.  OBJECTIVES: Using a living systematic review approach, to assess whether convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin transfusion is effective and safe in the treatment of people with COVID-19; and to maintain the currency of the evidence.

SEARCH METHODS

To identify completed and ongoing studies, we searched the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease Research Database, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, the Epistemonikos COVID-19 L*OVE Platform, and trial registries. Searches were done on 17 March 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, age, gender or ethnicity. For safety assessments, we also included non-controlled non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) if 500 or more participants were included. We excluded studies that included populations with other coronavirus diseases (severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)), as well as studies evaluating standard immunoglobulin.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane 'Risk of Bias 2' tool for RCTs, and for NRSIs, the assessment criteria for observational studies, provided by Cochrane Childhood Cancer. We rated the certainty of evidence, using the GRADE approach, for the following outcomes: all-cause mortality, improvement and worsening of clinical status (for individuals with moderate to severe disease), development of severe clinical COVID-19 symptoms (for individuals with asymptomatic or mild disease), quality of life (including fatigue and functional independence), grade 3 or 4 adverse events, and serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 studies (12 RCTs, 1 NRSI) with 48,509 participants, of whom 41,880 received convalescent plasma. We did not identify any completed studies evaluating hyperimmune immunoglobulin. We identified a further 100 ongoing studies evaluating convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin, and 33 studies reporting as being completed or terminated. Individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and moderate to severe disease Eleven RCTs and one NRSI investigated the use of convalescent plasma for 48,349 participants with moderate to severe disease. Nine RCTs compared convalescent plasma to placebo treatment or standard care alone, and two compared convalescent plasma to standard plasma (results not included in abstract). Effectiveness of convalescent plasma We included data on nine RCTs (12,875 participants) to assess the effectiveness of convalescent plasma compared to placebo or standard care alone.  Convalescent plasma does not reduce all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.05; 7 RCTs, 12,646 participants; high-certainty evidence). It has little to no impact on clinical improvement for all participants when assessed by liberation from respiratory support (RR not estimable; 8 RCTs, 12,682 participants; high-certainty evidence). It has little to no impact on the chance of being weaned or liberated from invasive mechanical ventilation for the subgroup of participants requiring invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.93; 2 RCTs, 630 participants; low-certainty evidence). It does not reduce the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.08; 4 RCTs, 11,765 participants; high-certainty evidence). We did not identify any subgroup differences.  We did not identify any studies reporting quality of life, and therefore, do not know whether convalescent plasma has any impact on quality of life. One RCT assessed resolution of fatigue on day 7, but we are very uncertain about the effect (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.42; 309 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Safety of convalescent plasma We included results from eight RCTs, and one NRSI, to assess the safety of convalescent plasma. Some of the RCTs reported on safety data only for the convalescent plasma group.  We are uncertain whether convalescent plasma increases or reduces the risk of grade 3 and 4 adverse events (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.41; 4 RCTs, 905 participants; low-certainty evidence), and serious adverse events (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.90; 2 RCTs, 414 participants; low-certainty evidence).  A summary of reported events of the NRSI (reporting safety data for 20,000 of 35,322 transfused participants), and four RCTs reporting safety data only for transfused participants (6125 participants) are included in the full text. Individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and asymptomatic or mild disease We identified one RCT reporting on 160 participants, comparing convalescent plasma to placebo treatment (saline).  Effectiveness of convalescent plasma We are very uncertain about the effect of convalescent plasma on all-cause mortality (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.65; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of convalescent plasma on developing severe clinical COVID-19 symptoms (RR not estimable; low-certainty evidence).  We identified no study reporting quality of life.  Safety of convalescent plasma We do not know whether convalescent plasma is associated with a higher risk of grade 3 or 4 adverse events (very low-certainty evidence), or serious adverse events (very low-certainty evidence). This is a living systematic review. We search weekly for new evidence and update the review when we identify relevant new evidence. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We have high certainty in the evidence that convalescent plasma for the treatment of individuals with moderate to severe disease does not reduce mortality and has little to no impact on measures of clinical improvement. We are uncertain about the adverse effects of convalescent plasma. While major efforts to conduct research on COVID-19 are being made, heterogeneous reporting of outcomes is still problematic. There are 100 ongoing studies and 33 studies reporting in a study registry as being completed or terminated. Publication of ongoing studies might resolve some of the uncertainties around hyperimmune immunoglobulin therapy for people with any disease severity, and convalescent plasma therapy for people with asymptomatic or mild disease.

The Three Pillars of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Therapy

The new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has spread rapidly around the world in the last year causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which still is a severe threat for public health. The therapeutic management of COVID-19 is challenging as, up until now, no specific and efficient pharmacological therapy has been validated. Translating the experience from previous viral epidemics, passive immunotherapy by means of plasma from individuals recovered from COVID-19 has been intensively investigated since the beginning of the pandemic. In this narrative review, we critically analyze the three factors, named “pillars”, that play a key role in determining the clinical effectiveness of this biologic therapy: the convalescent plasma, the disease (COVID-19), and the patients.

Convalescent Plasma for the Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Quantitative Analysis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by a novel coronavirus termed SARS-CoV-2, has spread quickly worldwide. Convalescent plasma (CP) obtained from patients following recovery from COVID-19 infection and development of antibodies against the virus is an attractive option for either prophylactic or therapeutic treatment, since antibodies may have direct or indirect antiviral activities and immunotherapy has proven effective in principle and in many clinical reports.

OBJECTIVE

We seek to characterize the latest advances and evidence in the use of CP for COVID-19 through a systematic review and quantitative analysis, identify knowledge gaps in this setting, and offer recommendations and directives for future research.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were continuously searched for studies assessing the use of CP for COVID-19, including clinical studies, commentaries, reviews, guidelines or protocols, and in vitro testing of CP antibodies. The screening process and data extraction were performed according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Quality appraisal of all clinical studies was conducted using a universal tool independent of study designs. A meta-analysis of case-control and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Substantial literature has been published covering various aspects of CP therapy for COVID-19. Of the references included in this review, a total of 243 eligible studies including 64 clinical studies, 79 commentary articles, 46 reviews, 19 guidance and protocols, and 35 in vitro testing of CP antibodies matched the criteria. Positive results have been mostly observed so far when using CP for the treatment of COVID-19. There were remarkable heterogeneities in the CP therapy with respect to patient demographics, donor antibody titers, and time and dose of CP administration. The studies assessing the safety of CP treatment reported low incidence of adverse events. Most clinical studies, in particular case reports and case series, had poor quality. Only 1 RCT was of high quality. Randomized and nonrandomized data were found in 2 and 11 studies, respectively, and were included for meta-analysis, suggesting that CP could reduce mortality and increase viral clearance. Despite promising pilot studies, the benefits of CP treatment can only be clearly established through carefully designed RCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

There is developing support for CP therapy, particularly for patients who are critically ill or mechanically ventilated and resistant to antivirals and supportive care. These studies provide important lessons that should inform the planning of well-designed RCTs to generate more robust knowledge for the efficacy of CP in patients with COVID-19. Future research is necessary to fill the knowledge gap regarding prevention and treatment for patients with COVID-19 with CP while other therapeutics are being developed.

COVID-19 Treatment: Drug Safety Prior to Conception and During Pregnancy and Breastfeeding

In December 2019, a new viral respiratory infection known as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first diagnosed in the city of Wuhan, China. COVID-19 quickly spread across the world, leading the World Health Organization to declare it a pandemic on March 11, 2020. The disease is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a similar virus to those involved in other epidemics such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). Epidemiological studies have shown that COVID-19 frequently affects young adults of reproductive age and that the elderly and patients with chronic disease have high mortality rates. Little is known about the impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy and breastfeeding. Most COVID-19 cases present with mild flu-like symptoms and only require treatment with symptomatic relief medications, whereas other cases with COVID-19 require treatment in an intensive care unit. There is currently no specific effective treatment for COVID-19. A large number of drugs are being used to fight infection by SARS-CoV-2. Experience with this therapeutic arsenal has been gained over the years in the treatment of other viral, autoimmune, parasitic, and bacterial diseases. Importantly, the search for an effective treatment for COVID-19 cannot expose pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2 to the potential teratogenic risks of these drugs. Therefore, it is necessary to determine and understand the safety of anti-COVID-19 therapies prior to conception and during pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Therapeutic options in the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in pregnant patient

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic has resulted in the development of various therapeutics to treat and prevent major complications related to the virus; pregnant patients are vulnerable to acquiring severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 because of frequent contact with the healthcare setting. Despite the publication of a plethora of case series and randomized control trials of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 therapeutics, few have addressed treatment in the pregnant population. To date, there has been no published review of therapeutic options in the treatment of pregnant patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Here, we provide a review of available treatments for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, various trials with inclusion and exclusion of the pregnant patients, and potential side effects of each treatment in the pregnant patient.