Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30930952›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2019

Randomized, Double-Blinded, Multicenter, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Shenfu Injection for Treatment of Patients with Chronic Heart Failure during the Acute Phase of Symptom Aggravation (Yang and Qi Deficiency Syndrome).

Xianliang Wang, Zhiqiang Zhao, Jingyuan Mao, Tinghai Du, Yuanping Chen, Hao Xu, Nan Liu, Xiaolong Wang, Jianguang Wu, Rong Li and 10 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.

Xianliang WangFirst Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Tianjin, 300193, China.
Zhiqiang ZhaoFirst Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Tianjin, 300193, China.
Jingyuan MaoFirst Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Tianjin, 300193, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9882-7406
Tinghai DuThe First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of T.C.M., Henan, 450000, China.
Yuanping ChenThe First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Guangxi, 530000, China.
Hao XuXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences (CACMS), Beijing, 100091, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3139-4087
Nan LiuThe First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of T.C.M, Guangzhou, 510450, China.
Xiaolong WangDepartment of Cardiovascular, Shuguang Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, China.
Jianguang WuAffiliated Hospital of Jiangxi University of T.C.M., Jiangxi, 330000, China.
Rong LiThe First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of T.C.M, Guangzhou, 510450, China.
Yong XuTeaching Hospital of Chengdu University of T.C.M., Chengdu, 610000, China.
Yingqiang ZhaoSecond Affiliated Hospital of Tianjin University of T.C.M., Tianjin, 300143, China.
Lei WangWest China Hospital of Sichuan University, Sichuan, 610000, China.
Jingsong HeRuikang Hospital Affiliated to Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Guangxi, 530000, China.
Junhua ZhangEvidence-Based Medicine Center, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 300193, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4043-1967
Jingbo ZhaiEvidence-Based Medicine Center, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 300193, China.
Guoyuan ZhaoFirst Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Tianjin, 300193, China.
Yazhu HouFirst Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Tianjin, 300193, China.
Shuai WangFirst Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Tianjin, 300193, China.
Chunxiang LiuEvidence-Based Medicine Center, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 300193, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4063-3729
First Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNTianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNGuangzhou University · CNShanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNAffiliated Hospital of Jiangxi University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNChengdu University · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNGuangxi University of Chinese Medicine · CNSichuan University · CNThe First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNTianjin University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShenfu injection (SFI) has shown a remarkable therapeutic effect in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) during the acute phase of symptom aggravation since it became commercially available in 1987. However, the therapeutic effect of SFI has not been validated in a standard clinical study. As a pilot clinical trial, this study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of SFI for treatment of CHF patients during the acute phase.

methodsA total of 160 patients experiencing acute phase CHF were enrolled in this study and randomly assigned to receive the placebo (placebo group, 150 ml glucose (GS)) or SFI (SFI group, 50 ml SFI + 100 ml GS) in addition to their standard medications for CHF treatment. The treatment lasted for 7 ± 1 days, and the follow-up continued for 28 ± 3 days after treatment. The primary endpoints were New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) syndrome scores.

resultsAfter 7±1 days of treatment, the efficacy of SFI according to improvements in NYHA and TCM syndrome scores in the SFI group (78.38% and 89.19%, respectively) was significantly higher than that in the placebo group (61.43% and 60.00%, respectively; P<0.05). The SFI group had a longer increase in amplitude than the placebo group (113.00 m versus 82.99 m, P<0.05). The incidence of adverse events and other safety indices showed no significant differences between the two groups.

conclusionSFI combined with conventional therapy for treatment of CHF during acute symptom aggravation ameliorated the cardiac dysfunction and clinical symptoms and improved the patients' quality of life without any significant AEs compared with the conventional therapy alone.

Identifiers

PMID30930952
PMCPMC6413379
OpenAlexW2915560395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.