ArticleTranslational gastroenterology and hepatology2018
A systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment for hepatorenal syndrome with traditional Chinese medicine.
Article in Translational gastroenterology and hepatology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimal Management of Cirrhotic Ascites: A Review for Internal Medicine Physicians.Journal of translational internal medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a life-threatening complication of end-stage liver diseases. It has been reported that traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) may improve liver function, delay disease progression, alleviate symptoms, and improve quality of life in HRS patients. The study aims to systematically review the efficacy of TCM for the treatment of HRS.
methodsPublications were searched electronically from China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, VIP, PubMed, and EMBASE databases. Odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Heterogeneity was assessed. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to assess the risk of bias.
resultsFourteen randomized controlled trials involving 788 patients with HRS were included. Random generation sequence was reported in only two studies. Blinding was not used in any study. Compared to conventional treatment without TCM, TCM led to a significant survival benefit during hospitalization (OR: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.08-0.39; P<0.0001), a significantly higher complete response (OR: 3.20; 95% CI: 2.06-4.97; P<0.00001), and a significantly lower no response (OR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.14-0.30; P<0.00001). Partial response was not significantly different between the two groups (OR: 1.39; 95% CI: 0.90-2.15; P=0.14). Regardless of TCM, blood urea nitrogen and abdominal circumference were significantly decreased, and urine volume was significantly increased after treatment. Compared to conventional treatment without TCM, TCM led to a significantly lower serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, bilirubin, plasma ammonia, and abdominal circumference and significantly higher urine volume after treatment. There was significant heterogeneity.
conclusionsTCM might have a better survival and a higher complete response in patients with HRS. However, the quality of published studies was unsatisfactory.
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.