ReviewPakistan journal of medical sciences2025
Safety of Teduglutide for Managing Patients with Short Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Review in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Short bowel syndrome (SBS), characterized by insufficient absorptive surface after extensive intestinal resection, results in chronic intestinal failure and reliance on parenteral nutrition. This meta-analysis aimed to examine the adverse events associated with teduglutide treatment for SBS. Methodology: Comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and CINAHL databases for studies of SBS patients who received teduglutide as part of their therapeutic regimen and time period of search was from inception of database till last date of search (30 June 2023). Given nature of research question and absence of control arms, we performed a single-arm meta-analysis to pool prevalence estimates of each adverse event using random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by chi-square test and I Results: Overall, 17 studies were included in analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that gastrointestinal side effects were prevalent in about 49% of patients [95% CI: 0.32-0.66]. Upper respiratory tract infections, central venous catheter-related infections, pyrexia and sepsis were seen in 29% [95% CI: 0.20-0.39], 11% [95% CI: 0.04-0.20], 23% [95% CI: 0.11-0.37] and 22% [95% CI: 0.13-0.31] of patients, respectively. Hepatic, biliary and pancreatic complications, electrolyte imbalances, dehydration, cardiac complications, injection site reactions and urinary tract infections had prevalence of 11% [95% CI: 0.07-0.17], 13% [95% CI: 0.00-0.37], 11% [95% CI: 0.08-0.16], 5% [95% CI: 0.00-0.12], 13% [95% CI: 0.05-0.24] and 12% [95% CI: 0.06-0.21], respectively. Conclusion: This meta-analysis highlights the significant adverse event profile associated with teduglutide in the management of SBS. While the drug presents an essential therapeutic option, healthcare professionals must carefully monitor the occurrence of these side effects. Meta-analysis PROSPERO: CRD42023447985.
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.