Trial reportWiener klinische Wochenschrift2015
N-acetylcysteine in patients with COPD exacerbations associated with increased sputum.
Trial report in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mucolytics for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2023Pooled it
- A double-blind randomized controlled trial of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) for the treatment of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Respirology case reports · 2024Trial
- Positive Expiratory Pressure Therapy With And Without Oscillation And Hospital Length Of Stay For Acute Exacerbation Of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2019Trial
- Mucolytic Effectiveness of Tyloxapol in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease - A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial.PloS one · 2016Trial
- N-acetylcysteine: evidence based consensus document on the therapeutic advantages in respiratory diseases (NECTAR).Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Effect of Antioxidants in the Treatment of COPD Patients: Scoping Review.Journal of nutrition and metabolism · 2021Article
- Article
- N-acetylcysteine in the Management of Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.Cureus · 2019Article
- Emerging pharmaceutical therapies for COPD.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundN-acetylcysteine (NAC) has been shown not to alter the clinical outcome in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. However, NAC may improve symptoms through its mucolytic effect in the subgroup of patients with increased sputum production. The aims of this study were to determine whether NAC improves symptoms and pulmonary function in patients with COPD exacerbation and increased sputum production.
methodsThis was a placebo-controlled study, where patients with severe COPD and increased sputum production, who were hospitalized for an exacerbation, were included. They were randomized to receive either NAC 200 mg tid or placebo in addition to the usual treatment.
resultsForty-two patients were included and were equally distributed to NAC and placebo groups. The symptoms, namely, ease of sputum production and dyspnea at rest and on exertion significantly improved in both groups; but there was no difference in improvement between NAC and placebo groups (p = 0.96, 0.62, 0.31, respectively). Similarly, forced expiratory volume-one second (FEV1) and PaO2 levels improved significantly in NAC (964 ± 599-1239 ± 543 ml, p < 0.001, and 57.5 ± 14.5-70.5 ± 16.0 mmHg, p < 0.001, respectively) and placebo groups (981 ± 514-1180 ± 535 ml, p < 0.001 and 57.9 ± 14.3-68.7 ± 19.0 mmHg, p < 0.001, respectively), without any difference between the two groups (p = 0.52 and 0.57). There was no difference in the number of exacerbations during the 6-month follow-up period.
conclusionNAC does not have any beneficial effect on clinical outcomes in patients with severe COPD exacerbation associated with increased and/or viscous mucus production.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.