SynthesisPloS one2024
Comparative efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine injections in patients with transient ischemic attack: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTraditional Chinese medicine (TCM) injections are extensively utilized for the treatment of transient ischemic attack (TIA). However, it remains unclear which specific TCM injection exhibits superior efficacy. In this study, we conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of various TCM injections in the treatment of TIA, with the aim of identifying the optimal treatment regimen.
designWe searched seven databases to collect information on nine TCM injections for the treatment of transient randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the treatment of transient ischemic attacks were collected from the establishment to August 2023. The methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using the RoB 2.0 evaluation tool, and reticulated Meta-analysis was performed using R software and Stata software.
resultsWe ultimately included 58 RCTs involving 5502 patients and comprising 9 TCM injections. In terms of improving the total effective rate, Shuxuetong injection (P-score = 0.69) was the most effective. In addition, Shuxuetong injection was most effective in lowering total cholesterol (P-score = 1.00) and triglyceride (P-score = 1.00) levels. Notably, Shuxuetong injection remained the most prominent in reducing fibrinogen (P-score = 0.91). However, among other blood hemorheology indicators, Dengzhanhuasu injection was the best regimen in reducing plasma viscosity (P-score = 1.00), whole blood viscosity (high shear rate) (P-score = 0.87), and whole blood viscosity (low shear rate) (P-score = 0.90). It was found that Yinxingyetiquwu injection (P-score = 0.72) was the most effective in reducing the incidence of cerebral infarction. In terms of safety, 22 studies reported adverse effects and descriptive analyses showed that the number of adverse effects of combination therapy was comparable to that of conventional therapy and that the safety profile was good.
conclusionsTCM injections in combination with CT may be a safe and effective intervention for patients with TIA, of which Shuxuetong injection, Dengzhanhuasu injection, and Yinxingyetiquwu injection may be more noteworthy. The quality of the literature included in the study was low, so further validation is needed with larger sample sizes, higher quality, and more rigorously designed RCTs. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: [PROSPERO], identifier [CRD42023443652].
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.