1000/1000
Hot
Most Recent
Coronaviruses are single-stranded ribonucleic acid viruses comprising a lipid bilayer containing crown-like spikes (Latin, Corona = Crown) on their outer surface.
Population Location |
Method | Findings | Reference |
---|---|---|---|
18 patients with ARDS 1 Barcelona, Spain. |
Plasma HPLC-PDA 2 |
17 patients had <8 µM vitamin C 1 patient had 14 µM vitamin C |
[23] |
21 ICU 3 patients Thornton, Colorado, USA |
Serum | Total cohort (n = 21) had 22 µM vitamin C (45% were deficient, 70% were hypovitaminosis C) Survivors (n = 11) had 29 µM vitamin C Non-Survivors (n = 10) had 15 µM vitamin C |
[22] |
31 hospitalised patients 51 healthy controlsShanghai, China |
Plasma UHPLC-MS 4 |
6 patients (no IVC 5) had 11 µM vitamin C 25 patients given 100 mg/kg/day IVC had 76 µM 51 healthy controls had 52 µM vitamin C |
[21] |
50 symptomatic patients 21 healthy controls Jigwa, Nigeria |
Serum Colourimetric |
Patients had 19 µM vitamin C Controls had 25 µM vitamin C |
[25] |
9 ICU patients with severe pneumonia Liège, Belgium |
Patients had 22 µM vitamin C (reference range: 35–86 µM) |
[26] | |
67 patients with ARDS Barcelona, Spain |
Plasma HPLC |
Mean vitamin C concentration was 8 ± 3 µM 55 patients (82%) had values <23 µM 12 patients (18%) had values <6 µM |
[24] |
1 ARDS: acute respiratory distress syndrome, 2 PDA: photo diode array, 3 ICU: intensive care unit, 4 UHPLC-MS: ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry, 5 IVC: intravenous vitamin C. Note: vitamin C concentrations <11 µM are considered deficient, and <23 µM are considered hypovitaminosis C.
Population Mean Age Location |
Intervention Duration |
Findings (IVC vs. Control) | Reference |
---|---|---|---|
54 patients with COVID-19-pneumonia and multiple organ injury Age = 67 ± 13 years Wuhan, Hubei, China |
IVC 1 24 g/day (n = 27) or placebo (n= 29) for 7 days |
Higher PaO2/FiO2 2 (229 vs. 151 mmHg, p = 0.01) Lower Interleukin-6 (19 vs. 158 pg/mL, p = 0.04) Lower ICU 3 and hospital mortality in patients with SOFA 4 scores ≥3 (4 vs. 10 days, p = 0.03) No difference in ventilation-free days (26.5 vs. 10.5 days, p = 0.56) |
[28] |
150 patients with severe COVID-19 Age = 52–53 years Karachi, Pakistan |
IVC 50 mg/kg/day + standard therapy or standard therapy (75 per group) |
Patients became symptom-free earlier (7.1 ± 1.8 vs. 9.6 ± 2.1 days, p < 0.0001) Patients spent fewer days in the hospital (8.1 ± 1.8 vs. 10.7 ± 2.2 days, p < 0.0001) No difference in need for mechanical ventilation (16% vs. 20%, p = 0.4) No difference in mortality (9.3% vs. 14.6%, p = 0.3) |
[30] |
60 patients with COVID-19 Age = 57–61 years Tehran, Iran |
IVC 6 g/day + standard therapy or standard therapy (30 per group) for 5 days |
Lower body temperature on 3rd day of hospitalisation (p = 0.001) Improvement in oxygen saturation on 3rd day of hospitalisation (p = 0.014) No differences in length of ICU stay or mortality |
[31] |
1 IVC: intravenous vitamin C, 2 PaO2/FiO2: ratio of partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen, 3 ICU: intensive care unit, 4 SOFA: sequential organ failure assessment.
An open label RCT of 150 critical COVID-19 patients in Karachi, Pakistan, administered IVC at 50 mg/kg/day (3.5 g for 70 kg person) along with standard care or standard therapy alone and reported that the IVC group became symptom-free earlier (7.1 vs. 9.6 days, p < 0.0001), and spent fewer days in the hospital (8.1 vs. 10.7 days, p < 0.0001; Table 2) [30]. However, there were non-significant reductions in need for mechanical ventilation and mortality. A similar open label RCT in Tehran, Iran, randomised 60 patients with COVID-19 to 6 g/day IVC for five days or standard care [31]. Body temperature was reduced (p = 0.001) and oxygenation (SpO2) increased (p = 0.014) after three days of receiving the treatment. There were, however, no differences in ICU length of stay or mortality.