Evidence Hub

A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study on the Efficacy and Safety of Methylprednisolone Pulse Therapy for COVID-19 Pneumonia

K. Yokota, H. Noma, Norihito Tarumoto, Noriomi Ishibashi, Jun Sakai, S. Maesaki, S. Iida, Yoshitaka Uchida et al.

COVID, 2022

48 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with fatal acute respiratory distress syndrome, which can be ameliorated by methylprednisolone pulse therapy, thereby reducing the risk of progression to respiratory failure and death. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone pulse therapy for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. In this retrospective, observational cohort study, seventy patients (age, 35–91 years) who were admitted to Saitama Medical University Hospital in Japan between March 2020 and January 2021 due to COVID-19 pneumonia were included. The difference in mortality between the methylprednisolone pulse therapy (n = 22) and dexamethasone therapy (n = 48) groups was the primary outcome. Between-group differences in the average length of intensive care unit stay, duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, and incidence of treatment-related adverse events were the secondary outcomes. The methylprednisolone pulse therapy group showed a significantly lower mortality rate (3.8% vs. 20.2%, p = 0.006) and increased survival rate compared with the dexamethasone therapy group (p = 0.044). Additionally, without statistical significance, the average length of intensive care unit stay tended to be shorter in the methylprednisolone pulse therapy group (11.5 ± 6.1 days) than in the dexamethasone therapy group (22.3 ± 23.1 days) (p = 0.793). The average duration of invasive mechanical ventilation also tended to be shorter in the methylprednisolone…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 48 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free