Neonatal outcomes after neuraminidase inhibitor use during pregnancy: A meta-analysis of cohort studies.

AIM: Influenza infection poses a severe threat to pregnant mothers, and antiviral treatment is recommended. However, the safety of neuraminidase-inhibitor antiviral medications during pregnancy has not been well described. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the adverse neonatal outcomes associated with exposure to neuraminidase inhibitors during pregnancy. The PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify potential studies for inclusion. RESULTS: Nine cohort studies that estimated adverse neonatal outcomes associated with exposure to neuraminidase-inhibitor medication during pregnancy were included. Exposure to a neuraminidase inhibitor during pregnancy was not associated with an increased risk of congenital malformation (odds ratio [OR] 0.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-1.12, P = .341), low Apgar score (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.77-1.2, P = .733) or preterm birth (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.89-1.09, P = .771) compared with no exposure. However, exposure to a neuraminidase inhibitor was associated with a reduced risk of low birth weight (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.68-0.92, P = .002) and giving birth to a small-for-gestational-age infant (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69-0.88, P < .001). Further analyses limited to oseltamivir exposure were consistent with the overall results. CONCLUSION: Exposure to neuraminidase-inhibitor medication during pregnancy does not appear to be associated with adverse neonatal outcomes. We recommend further studies to investigate this association, which will help clinicians determine whether to prescribe a neuraminidase inhibitor during pregnancy.

Effectiveness and Safety of Sofosbuvir-Velpatasvir in Patients with Cirrhosis Associated with Genotype 3 Hepatitis C Infection in Xinjiang, China.

Purpose: Patients with cirrhosis from genotype 3 (GT3) hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are difficult to cure. This study investigated the effectiveness and safety of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) with and without ribavirin (RBV) in patients with GT3 HCV-infection-related cirrhosis from Xinjiang, China. Patients and Methods: This study included 33 patients with GT3 HCV infected cirrhosis, who were treated with either SOF/VEL+RBV for 12 weeks (n = 27) or SOF/VEL alone for 24 weeks (n = 6) between January 2019 and June 2021. The primary endpoint was a sustained virological response at 12 weeks (SVR12), post-treatment. Secondary endpoints included changes from baseline in Child-Pugh-Turcotte scores, clinical results, hepatic-encephalopathy status, ascites, and gastrointestinal bleeding at 12 weeks, post-treatment. Results: Out of the 33 patients, 18 (54.6%) were diagnosed with GT3a, 15 (45.4%) with GT3b, 16 (48.5%) with compensated cirrhosis, and 17 (51.5%) with decompensated cirrhosis. SVR12 was 87.9% (compensated cirrhosis: 93.8%, decompensated cirrhosis: 82.4%). The Child-Pugh-Turcotte scores improved at 12 weeks (p < 0.05). Total bilirubin, albumin, and alanine transaminase levels, as well as hepatic-encephalopathy were significantly improved among patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis (p < 0.05). The blood cell count and serum creatinine levels did not deteriorate. Conclusion: SOF/VEL, with and without RBV, was effective, safe, and well-tolerated as a treatment for GT3 HCV associated cirrhosis.

Minor Change of Plasma Renin Activity during the Saline Infusion Test Provide an Auxiliary Diagnostic Value for Primary Aldosteronism.

OBJECTIVE: To clarify whether it has some hidden diagnostic values for PA, especially in the case of an inconclusive SIT result, we investigated the difference in changes of plasma renin activity (PRA) during SIT between patients with PA and non-PA. METHODS: We measured and compared the SIT parameters of 159 PA patients, 368 non-PA patients, and 43 inconclusive patients who were included in this study. RESULTS: The PA group showed a minor change of PRA during the SIT (ΔPRA, defined as (pre-SIT PRA-post-SIT PRA)) compared with the non-PA group (0.17 ng/ml/h vs. 1.07 ng/ml/h, P < 0.001). According to ROC analysis, ΔPRA showed a greater AUC than post-SIT PRA (0.897 vs. 0.855, P < 0.001). The cutoff value was 0.5 ng/ml/h, with 90.3% sensitivity and 78.6% specificity. When combined with ARR post-SIT, it showed 81.6% sensitivity and 97.0% specificity for PA diagnosis. Further analysis of 43 patients with an inconclusive SIT result who completed AVS found that ΔPRA was smaller in the confirmed PA group compared with the unconfirmed PA group (0.19 ng/ml/h vs. 0.29 ng/ml/h, P < 0.05); there was no significant difference in PAC post-SIT between two groups. ΔPRA ≤ 0.21 ng/ml/h provides 71.4% sensitivity, 80.0% specificity, and 87.0% PPV for their PA diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: PA patients show minor PRA change during SIT; the change of PRA during SIT provides an auxiliary diagnostic value for PA, especially in patients with an inconclusive SIT result.