SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2019
Mucolytic agents versus placebo for chronic bronchitis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06377410 (A Randomised, Open Label, Interventional Study Evaluating the Efficacy & Safety of Dry Powder Ivy Extract), which is not on this map. Cited by 47 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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.
A Randomised, Open Label, Interventional Study Evaluating the Efficacy & Safety of Dry Powder Ivy Extract (Syrup Prospan) Versus NAC Among COPD Patients (SyProNAC Trial)
Who cites it
47 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy of Carbocisteine in Reducing Exacerbations in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Advances in respiratory medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Mucolytics for children with chronic suppurative lung disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- A 7-point evidence-based care discharge protocol for patients hospitalized for exacerbation of COPD: consensus strategy and expert recommendation.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2024Pooled it
- 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
- Interventions to improve adherence to pharmacological therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- The efficacy ofTherapeutic advances in respiratory diseasePooled it
- COPD Patients with a High Exacerbation Risk: Baseline Data Analysis of a National Chinese Prospective Multi-Center Study of Quality Improvement Project.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026Trial
- Efficacy and safety of HL-301 compared with erdosteine in acute bronchitis: a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2025Trial
- Home high-flow therapy during recovery from severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation: a mixed-methods feasibility randomised control trial.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Trial
- Effect of high-dose N-acetylcysteine on exacerbations and lung function in patients with mild-to-moderate COPD: a double-blind, parallel group, multicentre randomised clinical trial.Nature communications · 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
- Association of Airway Mucus Plugs and Physical Activity, Exercise Tolerance, Sarcopenia, and Frailty in Patients With COPD and Pre-COPD.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2026Observational
- Mucoactive Agents in Muco-Obstructive Lung Diseases: A Critical Reappraisal of Pharmacological Effects and Clinical Outcomes.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Airway Mucosal Defense: Mucins, Innate Immunity, and Contemporary Mucoactive Strategies.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Antioxidants as Therapeutic Tools in the Management of COPD: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
- Soft Artificial Ciliary Brush with Integrated Haptic Feedback for Efficient Airway Mucus Cleaning.Advanced intelligent systems (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2026Article
- N-acetylcysteine: evidence based consensus document on the therapeutic advantages in respiratory diseases (NECTAR).Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Synergistic action of mucoactive drugs and phages againstMicrobiology spectrum · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndividuals with chronic bronchitis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may suffer recurrent exacerbations with an increase in volume or purulence of sputum, or both. Personal and healthcare costs associated with exacerbations indicate that therapies that reduce the occurrence of exacerbations are likely to be useful. Mucolytics are oral medicines that are believed to increase expectoration of sputum by reducing its viscosity, thus making it easier to cough it up. Improved expectoration of sputum may lead to a reduction in exacerbations of COPD.
objectivesPrimary objective• To determine whether treatment with mucolytics reduces exacerbations and/or days of disability in patients with chronic bronchitis or COPDSecondary objectives• To assess whether mucolytics lead to improvement in lung function or quality of life• To determine frequency of adverse effects associated with use of mucolytics SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register and reference lists of articles on 12 separate occasions, most recently on 23 April 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised studies that compared oral mucolytic therapy versus placebo for at least two months in adults with chronic bronchitis or COPD. We excluded studies of people with asthma and cystic fibrosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: This review analysed summary data only, most derived from published studies. For earlier versions, one review author extracted data, which were rechecked in subsequent updates. In later versions, review authors double-checked extracted data and then entered data into RevMan 5.3 for analysis. MAIN
resultsWe added four studies for the 2019 update. The review now includes 38 trials, recruiting a total of 10,377 participants. Studies lasted between two months and three years and investigated a range of mucolytics, including N-acetylcysteine, carbocysteine, erdosteine, and ambroxol, given at least once daily. Many studies did not clearly describe allocation concealment, and we had concerns about blinding and high levels of attrition in some studies. The primary outcomes were exacerbations and number of days of disability.Results of 28 studies including 6723 participants show that receiving mucolytics may be more likely to be exacerbation-free during the study period compared to those given placebo (Peto odds ratio (OR) 1.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.56 to 1.91; moderate-certainty evidence). However, more recent studies show less benefit of treatment than was reported in earlier studies in this review. The overall number needed to treat with mucolytics for an average of nine months to keep an additional participant free from exacerbations was eight (NNTB 8, 95% CI 7 to 10). High heterogeneity was noted for this outcome (I² = 62%), so results need to be interpreted with caution. The type or dose of mucolytic did not seem to alter the effect size, nor did the severity of COPD, including exacerbation history. Longer studies showed smaller effects of mucolytics than were reported in shorter studies.Mucolytic use was associated with a reduction of 0.43 days of disability per participant per month compared with use of placebo (95% CI -0.56 to -0.30; studies = 9; I² = 61%; moderate-certainty evidence). With mucolytics, the number of people with one or more hospitalisations was reduced, but study results were not consistent (Peto OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.89; participants = 1788; studies = 4; I² = 58%; moderate-certainty evidence). Investigators reported improved quality of life with mucolytics (mean difference (MD) -1.37, 95% CI -2.85 to 0.11; participants = 2721; studies = 7; I² = 64%; moderate-certainty evidence). However, the mean difference did not reach the minimal clinically important difference of -4 units, and the confidence interval includes no difference. Mucolytic treatment was associated with a possible reduction in adverse events (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.94; participants = 7264; studies = 24; I² = 46%; moderate-certainty evidence), but the pooled effect includes no difference if a random-effects model is used. Several studies that could not be included in the meta-analysis reported high numbers of adverse events, up to a mean of five events per person during follow-up. There was no clear difference between mucolytics and placebo for mortality, but the confidence interval is too wide to confirm that treatment has no effect on mortality (Peto OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.87; participants = 3527; studies = 11; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS'
conclusionsIn participants with chronic bronchitis or COPD, we are moderately confident that treatment with mucolytics leads to a small reduction in the likelihood of having an acute exacerbation, in days of disability per month and possibly hospitalisations, but is not associated with an increase in adverse events. There appears to be limited impact on lung function or health-related quality of life. Results are too imprecise to be certain whether or not there is an effect on mortality. Our confidence in the results is reduced by high levels of heterogeneity in many of the outcomes and the fact that effects on exacerbations shown in early trials were larger than those reported by more recent studies. This may be a result of greater risk of selection or publication bias in earlier trials, thus benefits of treatment may not be as great as was suggested by previous evidence.
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.