SynthesisPloS one2022
Clinical efficacy of Chinese herbs for supplementing qi and activating blood circulation combined with N-acetylcysteine in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genome-wide DNA methylation analysis of Astragalus and Danshen on the intervention of myofibroblast activation in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2023Article
- Therapeutic Effect of Astragali Radix Extract Injection Combined with Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Bleomycin-Induced Pulmonary Fibrotic Rats.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChinese herbs for supplementing qi and activating blood circulation (CH) combined with N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is widely used for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) in China, but there is a lack of literature to evaluate its efficacy and clinical value. PURPOSE: This study compared CH + NAC with other treatments by network meta-analysis to clarify its clinical value.
methodsCochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang Data, VIP Database, and China Biology Medicine were searched. Outcomes included lung function (DLCO (%), VC (%), FVC (%), FVC (L)), 6-min walking distance (6MWD), score of St George's respiratory questionnaire (SGRQ), blood gas analysis (PaO2, PaCO2). The data were analyzed by Review Manager 5.4, Stata 12.0 and ADDIS 1.16.5.
results23 studies including 1390 patients (702 in intervention group and 688 in control group) were collected to compare 8 outcome indicators among different treatments involving CH, CH+NAC, CH+PFD, NAC, PFD and PFD+NAC on IPF. Network meta-analysis showed that CH was better than NAC in terms of DLCO (%) (MD = 5.14, 95%CI: 1.01 to 8.68) and 6MWD (MD = 49.17, 95%CI: 25.97 to 71.36) as well as PFD + NAC was better than NAC in terms of FVC (L) (MD = -0.56, 95%CI: -0.83 to -0.31). In rankings results, CH + NAC is the best in terms of FVC (%), SGRQ, PaO2 and PaCO2; CH is the best in terms of DLCO (%), VC (%) and 6MWD; CH + PFD is the best in terms of FVC (L).
conclusionCH related treatments may have advantages in the treatment of IPF and CH + NAC may have clinical application value. However, limited by the quality and quantity of researches included, more rational and scientific randomized controlled trials containing large sample sizes need to be conducted to further verify our conclusions.
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.