Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36697209›Full record

SynthesisEuropean respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society2023

Mucolytics for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a meta-analysis.

Efthymia Papadopoulou, Jan Hansel, Zsofia Lazar, Konstantinos Kostikas, Stavros Tryfon, Jørgen Vestbo, Alexander G Mathioudakis

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. InhaledEuropean respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Mucolytics for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. FeFrontiers in physiology · 2025
    Article
  11. Mucolytic Therapy in COPD: Patient Usage and Preferences in Real-World Italian Settings.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Observational
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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Efthymia PapadopoulouPulmonology Department, General Hospital of Thessaloniki 'G. Papanikolaou', Thessaloniki, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2415-0842
Jan HanselNorth West School of Intensive Care Medicine, Health Education England - North West, Manchester, UK.
Zsofia LazarDepartment of Pulmonology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2444-9040
Konstantinos KostikasRespiratory Medicine Department, University of Ioannina School of Medicine, Ioannina, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0774-3942
Stavros TryfonPulmonology Department, General Hospital of Thessaloniki 'G. Papanikolaou', Thessaloniki, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5102-0480
Jørgen VestboDivision of Immunology, Immunity to Infection and Respiratory Medicine, School of Biological Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6355-6362
Alexander G MathioudakisDivision of Immunology, Immunity to Infection and Respiratory Medicine, School of Biological Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK alexander.mathioudakis@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4675-9616
G. Papanikolaou General Hospital · GRManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBHealth Education North West · GBSemmelweis University · HUUniversity of Ioannina · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This meta-analysis explored the safety and effectiveness of mucolytics as an add-on treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. Based on a pre-registered protocol and following Cochrane methods, we systematically searched for relevant randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We used the Risk of Bias v2 tool for appraising the studies and performed random-effect meta-analyses when appropriate. We assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE. This meta-analysis included 24 RCTs involving 2192 patients with COPD exacerbations, entailing at least some concerns of methodological bias. We demonstrated with moderate certainty that mucolytics increase the rate of treatment success (relative risk 1.37, 95% CI 1.08-1.73, n=383), while they also exert benefits on overall symptom scores (standardised mean difference 0.86, 95% CI 0.63-1.09, n=316), presence of cough at follow-up (relative risk 1.93, 95% CI 1.15-3.23) and ease of expectoration (relative risk 2.94, 95% CI 1.68-5.12). Furthermore, low or very low certainty evidence suggests mucolytics may also reduce future risk of exacerbations and improve health-related quality of life, but do not impact on breathlessness, length of hospital stay, indication for higher level of care or serious adverse events. Overall, mucolytics could be considered for COPD exacerbation management. These findings should be validated in further, rigorous RCTs.

Indexed as

ExpectorantsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveDisease ProgressionHumansLength of StayQuality of LifeExpectorants

Identifiers

PMID36697209
PMCPMC9879332
OpenAlexW4318040413

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.