ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2016
Clinical Outcomes of Wulingsan Subtraction Decoction Treatment of Postoperative Brain Edema and Fever as a Complication of Glioma Neurosurgery.
Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Peritumoral Edema in Gliomas: A Review of Mechanisms and Management.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- The efficacy and safety of Wulingsan modified formulas for chronic heart failure patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective. To evaluate the efficacy of Wulingsan subtraction ( WLSS) decoction in the treatment of postoperative brain edema and fever as a complication of glioma neurosurgery. Methods. This retrospective study was conducted at the Department of Neurosurgery of Liaocheng People's Hospital. Patients hospitalized between March 2011 and December 2014 were divided into three groups: Group A received WLSS oral liquid (50 mL), twice a day; Group B received an intravenous infusion of mannitol; and Group C received WLSS combined with mannitol (n = 30 patients per group). All patients were treated for 10 days continuously. Therapeutic efficacy was evaluated by measuring body temperature and indicators of renal function before and 3, 5, and 10 days after treatment. Results. Compared to the other two groups, significantly greater clinical efficacy was observed in the patients treated with mannitol (Group B; P < 0.05), although marked clinical efficacy was also observed over time in patients treated with WLSS (Group A). After 5 days, the quantifiable effects of the WLSS and mannitol combination group (Group C) were substantial (P < 0.05). The renal damage in Group B was more obvious after 5 days and 10 days. Conclusion. Compared with mannitol treatment alone, WLSS combined with mannitol induced a more rapid reduction in body temperature. Our findings suggest that patients should be started on mannitol for 3 days and then switched to WLSS to achieve obvious antipyretic effects and protect renal function. This method of treatment should be considered for clinical applications.
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.