Cochrane · systematic review · CD013600
Convalescent plasma for people with COVID‐19: a living systematic review
Iannizzi, C, Chai, KL, Piechotta, V, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2023 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
32
current version
GRADE rated
19
No studies
13
Included studies
NR
No studies 13 · 40.6%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 6 · 18.8%Low 8 · 25%Moderate 2 · 6.3%High 3 · 9.4%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Show all 5 versionsSummary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma compared to placebo or standard care alone for individuals with moderate to severe disease
Population: individualswith moderate to severe disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality at up to day 28 ‐ total Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | RR 0.98 [0.92, 1.03] | 21 studies · 19021 participants | High |
Clinical worsening: need for invasive mechanical ventilation, or death at up to day 28 Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | RR 1.03 [0.97, 1.11] | 6 studies · 14477 participants | High |
Clinical improvement: participants discharged from hospital Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | RR 1 [0.97, 1.02] | 6 studies · 12721 participants | High |
Quality of life, Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 483 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Grades 3 and 4 adverse events Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | RR 1.17 [0.96, 1.42] | 6 studies · 2392 participants | Low Downgraded: inconsistency, indirectness, publication bias |
Serious adverse events ‐ total Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | RR 1.14 [0.91, 1.44] | 6 studies · 3901 participants | Moderate Downgraded: publication bias |
Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma compared to standard plasma for individuals with moderate to severe disease
Population: individuals with moderate to severe disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality at up to day 28 Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | RR 0.73 [0.45, 1.19] | 4 studies · 484 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Clinical worsening: need for invasive mechanical ventilation, or death at up to day 28 Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | RR 5.59 [0.29, 108.38] | 1 study · 34 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision |
Clinical improvement: participants discharged from hospital ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Quality of life, Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Grades 3 and 4 adverse events Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 248 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, indirectness |
Serious adverse events Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | RR 0.8 [0.55, 1.15] | 3 studies · 327 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, publication bias |
Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma compared to human immunoglobulin for individuals with moderate to severe disease
Population: individuals with moderate to severe disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality at up to day 28 Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs human immunoglobulin | RR 1.07 [0.76, 1.5] | 1 study · 190 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Clinical worsening: need for invasive mechanical ventilation, or death at up to day 28 ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs human immunoglobulin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Clinical improvement: participants discharged from hospital ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs human immunoglobulin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Quality of life ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs human immunoglobulin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Grades 3 and 4 adverse events ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs human immunoglobulin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Serious adverse events ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs human immunoglobulin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma compared to placebo or standard care alone for individuals with mild disease
Population: outpatients withmild disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality at up to day 28 Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | OR 0.36 [0.09, 1.46] | 2 studies · 536 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, indirectness |
Admission to hospital or death within 28 days Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | RR 1.05 [0.6, 1.84] | 1 study · 376 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Symptom resolution‐ all initial symptoms resolved ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Time to symptom resolution (absolute effect calculated for day 12) Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | HR 1.05 [0.85, 1.3] | 1 study · 376 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Quality of life, Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Grades 3 and 4 adverse events Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | RR 1.29 [0.75, 2.19] | 1 study · 376 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Serious adverse events Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard care alone | RR 1.14 [0.66, 1.94] | 1 study · 376 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma compared to standard plasma for outpatients with mild disease
Population: outpatients withmild disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality at up to day 28 Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | OR 0.3 [0.05, 1.75] | 2 studies · 1597 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision |
Admission to hospital or death within 28 days Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | RR 0.49 [0.31, 0.75] | 2 studies · 1595 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Symptom resolution‐ all initial symptoms resolved Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | RR 1.12 [0.98, 1.27] | 1 study · 416 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Time to symptom resolution ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Quality of life, Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Grades 3 and 4 adverse events ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Serious adverse events ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Convalescent plasma vs standard plasma | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |