Gastrointestinal symptoms and fecal nucleic acid testing of children with 2019 coronavirus disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

In order to understand the clinical manifestations and incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in children and discuss the importance of fecal nucleic acid testing.We retrospectively analyzed studies on gastrointestinal symptoms and fecal nucleic acid detection in pediatric COVID-19 patients from January 1, 2020 to August 10, 2020, including prospective clinical studies and case reports. The results of fecal nucleic acid detection were analyzed systematically. Stata12.0 software was used for meta-analysis.The results showed that the most common gastrointestinal symptoms in children with COVID-19 were vomiting and diarrhea, with a total incidence of 17.7% (95% Cl 13.9-21.5%). However, the prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms in other countries (21.1%, 95% CI 16.5-25.7%) was higher compared to China (12.9%, 95% CI 8-17.7%). In Wuhan, the pooled prevalence was much higher (41.3%, 95% CI 3.2-79.4%) compared to areas outside Wuhan in China (7.1%, 95% CI 4.0-10.3%). The positive rate of fecal nucleic acid testing in COVID-19 children was relatively high at 85.8% (91/106). Additionally, 71.2% (52/73) were still positive for fecal nucleic acid after respiratory tract specimens turned negative. One and two weeks after the respiratory tract specimens turned nucleic acid-negative, 45.2% (33/73) and 34.2% (25/73) patients, respectively, remained fecal nucleic acid-positive. The longest interval between the respiratory tract specimens turning negative and fecal specimens turning negative exceeded 70 days. Conclusions and relevance: gastrointestinal symptoms in pediatric COVID-19 are relatively common. Attention should be paid to the detection of fecal nucleic acids in children. Fecal nucleic acid-negative status should be considered as one of the desegregation standards.

Assessment of the risk of musculoskeletal adverse events associated with fluoroquinolone use in children: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics has been restricted in children because of their potential to cause adverse musculoskeletal events. This study was performed to systematically evaluate whether there is a difference between fluoroquinolone and non-fluoroquinolone antibiotics in terms of their associated risk of adverse musculoskeletal events in children. METHODS: Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed databases were used to retrieve studies related to fluoroquinolone and non-fluoroquinolone-induced musculoskeletal adverse events in children. A meta-analysis was performed using Stata 11. RESULTS: A total of 10 studies were included in the analysis. The combined results showed that there was no statistical difference between fluoroquinolone and non-fluoroquinolone groups in terms of musculoskeletal adverse events in children (risk ratio = 1.145, 95% confidence interval = 0.974 - 1.345, P = .101). Subgroup analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Here, the effects on the trovafloxacin and levofloxacin groups were significantly different from that of the control group. However, musculoskeletal adverse events due to either drug was not reported after long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results showed that fluoroquinolone and non-fluoroquinolone antibiotics were not different in terms of their ability to cause musculoskeletal adverse events in children. For this reason, fluoroquinolone antibiotics can be used in children as appropriate. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019133900.

Colloid solutions for fluid resuscitation in patients with sepsis: systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Colloids are widely used for fluid resuscitation in patients with sepsis. But the optimal type of fluid remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the effects on mortality and safety of different colloid solutions in patients with sepsis requiring volume replacement by examining direct comparisons of colloid solutions. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, China Biological Medicine Database, VIP Chinese Journals Database, and CNKI China National Knowledge Infrastructure Whole Article Database. Randomized clinical trials comparing different colloids in septic patients needing fluid resuscitation were selected. RESULTS: Seventeen randomized clinical trials with a total 1281 participants met the inclusion criteria. Mortality was obtained in all trials. For intervention of albumin vs. hydroxyethyl starch solution (HES), the relative risk (RR) of death was 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-1.30). For intervention of albumin vs. gelatin, the RR of death was 2.4 (95% CI 0.31-18.35). For intervention of gelatin vs. HES, the RR of death was 1.02 (95% CI 0.79-1.32). For the intervention of HES vs. dextran, the RR of death was 1.38 (95% CI 0.28-6.78). For the intervention of gelatin vs. dextran, RR of death was not estimable. For albumin vs. dextran, no trial was included. Four trials of intervention of albumin vs. HES recorded the change of severity score. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that one colloid solution is more effective and safer than another for fluid resuscitation in sepsis. The severity score is improved in HES, but the confidence intervals are wide.