Dataset Information

Efficacy of Xuebijing Injection for Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT:

Methods

PubMed Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biology Medicine disc, VIP, and Wanfang databases were searched. The primary outcome was treatment response. The secondary outcomes included changes in clinical and laboratory indicators and incidence of AP-related complications. Meta-analyses were performed by using a random-effect model. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% CIs were calculated.

Results

Overall, 23 RCTs were included. The rates of overall (RR = 1.16; 95% CI = 1.12 to 1.20; P < 0.00001) and complete (RR = 1.40; 95% CI = 1.30 to 1.50; P < 0.00001) responses were significantly higher in the Xuebijing injection group. After treatment, the levels of interleukin-6 (WMD = -18.22; 95% CI = -23.36 to -13.08; P < 0.00001), tumor necrosis factor-α (WMD = -16.44; 95% CI = -20.49 to -12.40; P < 0.00001), serum amylase (WMD = -105.61; 95% CI = -173.77 to -37.46; P=0.002), white blood cell (WMD = -1.51; 95% CI = -1.66 to -1.36; P < 0.00001), and C-reactive protein (WMD = -11.05; 95% CI = -14.32 to -7.78; P < 0.00001) were significantly lower in the Xuebijing injection group. Abdominal pain (WMD = -1.74; 95% CI = -1.96 to -1.52; P < 0.00001), abdominal distension (WMD = -1.56; 95% CI = -2.07 to -1.04; P < 0.00001), gastrointestinal function (WMD = -2.60; 95% CI = -3.07 to -2.13; P < 0.00001), body temperature (WMD = -2.16; 95% CI = -2.83 to -1.49; P < 0.00001), serum amylase level (WMD = -1.81; 95% CI = -2.66 to -0.96; P < 0.0001), and white blood cell (WMD = -2.16; 95% CI = -2.99 to -1.32; P < 0.00001) recovered more rapidly in the Xuebijing injection group. The incidence of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (RR = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.62; P=0.006), pancreatic pseudocyst (RR = 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.77; P=0.02), and renal failure (RR = 0.16; 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.60; P=0.006) was significantly lower in the Xuebijing injection group.

Conclusions

Xuebijing injection added on the basis of conventional treatment has a potential benefit for improving the outcomes of AP.

SUBMITTER: Chen H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8214658 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: At present, a number of systematic reviews (SRs) on Xuebijing injection (a patent in China) in the treatment of acute pancreatitis (AP) or severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) have been published. However, the quality of evidence is uneven and has not been comprehensively evaluated. Aim: We evaluated the efficacy of Xuebijing injection for AP/SAP through an overview of SR, and to provide a scientific basis for its effectiveness and safety. Methods: We searched Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, SinoMed, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP comprehensively. The retrieval period from inception to 30 November 2021, and the two reviewers independently complete the literature retrieval, data extraction and evaluation. The Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2) and the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) were used to evaluate the methodological quality and reporting quality of the SRs, respectively. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to evaluate the quality grading of outcomes and the risk of bias in SRs was evaluated by ROBIS Tool. Finally, the RCTs involved in SRs were synthesized. Stata15.1 was used for quantitative analysis of total effectiveness rate, time until relief of abdominal pain, time until relief of abdominal distension, and serum amylase level. Results: Nine eligible SRs were included, including 92 RCTs and 6,837 participants. The quality of SRs was relatively good, and the manuscript structures were relatively complete. However, the methodological quality of SRs was low or critically low. RoB rated 5 SRs as low risk of bias and 4 SRs as high risk of bias. In GRADE, a total of 47 results were included in the 9 SRs, of which 5 results (10.64%) were moderate quality, 22 results (46.81%) were low quality, and 20 results (42.55%) were very low quality. The results of data synthesis showed that Xuebijing injection combined treatment increased the total effectiveness rate of AP patients (RR = 1.19, 95% CI 1.17-1.23, p < 0.0001), and there was no heterogeneity between studies (I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.589). Compared with the control group, Xuebijing injection group shortened the abdominal pain and distension relief time in AP patients (WMD = -1.69, 95% CI -1.88--1.50, p < 0.0001; WMD = -1.48, 95% CI -1.74--1.23, p < 0.0001), with high heterogeneity (I2 = 84.3%, p = 0.000; I2 = 72.2%, p = 0.000). Serum amylase level was also reduced (WMD = -2.06, 95% CI -2.47--1.64, p < 0.0001), with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 71.6%, p = 0.000). A total of one SR reported adverse drug reaction (ADR), no ADRs were observed in the control group. Conclusion: Although the quality of the evidence is not high, it can still reflect the clinical value of Xuebijing injection as an analgesic and anti-inflammatory traditional Chinese medicine in the treatment of AP/SAP. Therefore, future clinical studies should focus on the long-term efficacy and adverse reactions of drugs. Systematic Review Registration: (website), identifier (registration number).

Project description:INTRODUCTION: Necrotic tissue infection can worsen the prognosis of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP), and probiotics have been shown to be beneficial in reducing the infection rate in animal experiments and primary clinical trials. However, the results of multicenter randomized clinical trials have been contradictory. Our aim in this study was to systematically review and quantitatively analyze all randomized controlled trials with regard to important outcomes in patients with predicted SAP who received probiotics. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases was conducted using specific search terms. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that compared the effects of probiotic with placebo treatment in patients with predicted SAP. Mean difference (MD), risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed- and random-effects models. A meta-analysis on the use of probiotics in the treatment of critically ill patients was also performed to serve as a reference. RESULTS: In this study, 6 trials comprising an aggregate total of 536 patients were analyzed. Significant heterogeneities were observed in the type, dose, treatment duration and clinical effects of probiotics in these trials. Systematic analysis showed that probiotics did not significantly affect the pancreatic infection rate (RR?=?1.19, 95% CI?=?0.74 to 1.93; P?=?0.47), total infections (RR?=?1.09, 95% CI?=?0.80 to 1.48; P?=?0.57), operation rate (RR?=?1.42, 95% CI?=?0.43 to 3.47; P?=?0.71), length of hospital stay (MD?=?2.45, 95% CI?=?-2.71 to 7.60; P?=?0.35) or mortality (RR?=?0.72, 95% CI?=?0.42 to 1.45; P?=?0.25). CONCLUSIONS: Probiotics showed neither beneficial nor adverse effects on the clinical outcomes of patients with predicted SAP. However, significant heterogeneity was noted between the trials reviewed with regard to the type, dose and treatment duration of probiotics, which may have contributed to the heterogeneity of the clinical outcomes. The current data are not sufficient to draw a conclusion regarding the effects of probiotics on patients with predicted SAP. Carefully designed clinical trials are needed to validate the effects of particular probiotics given at specific dosages and for specific treatment durations.

Project description:Background: Pain management is an important priority in the treatment of acute pancreatitis (AP). Current evidence and guideline recommendations are inconsistent on the most effective analgesic protocol. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of analgesics for pain relief in AP. Methods: A literature search was performed to identify all RCTs assessing analgesics in patients with AP. The primary outcome was the number of participants who needed rescue analgesia. Study quality was assessed using Jadad score. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were analysed using a random-effects model. Results: Twelve studies comprising 699 patients with AP (83% mild AP) were analysed. The tested analgesics significantly decreased the need for rescue analgesia (3 studies, OR.36, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.60) vs. placebo or conventional treatment. The analgesics also improved the pain score [Visual Analogue Scale (Δ-VAS)] at 24 h (WMD 18.46, 0.84 to 36.07) and by the 3rd to 7th days (WMD 11.57, 0.87 to 22.28). Opioids vs. non-opioids were associated with a decrease in the need for rescue analgesia (6 studies, OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.86, p = 0.03) but without significance in pain score. In subgroup analyses, opioids were similar to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) regarding the primary outcome (4 studies, OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.32, p = 0.18). There were no significant differences in other clinical outcomes and rate of adverse events. Other studies, comparing epidural anaesthesia vs. patient-controlled analgesia and opioid (buprenorphine) vs. opioid (pethidine) did not show significant difference in primary outcome. Study quality issues significantly contributed to overall study heterogeneity. Conclusions: NSAIDs and opioids are equally effective in decreasing the need for rescue analgesia in patients with mild AP. The relative paucity of trials and high-quality data in this setting is notable and the optimal analgesic strategy for patients with moderately severe and severe AP still requires to be determined.

Project description:IntroductionAs a common chronic disease with high morbidity and recurrent rate, acute cerebral infarction (ACI) affects the life quality of patients and gives them heavy psychological burden. And Danshen class injections (DSCIs) are commonly adopted in treating ACI. So, this network meta-analysis (NMA) was designed to assess the clinical efficacy of eight kinds of DSCIs.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, the China Biomedical Literature Service System, the Chinese Scientific Journals Full-text Database, and Wanfang database from their inception to 16th Dec. 2017 aiming to collect related randomized controlled trials (RCTs). And then data were analyzed through Stata and WinBUGS software based on the Bayesian statistical model. The results were reported as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% credible intervals (CIs). The consistency test between direct and indirect comparisons was also evaluated and inconsistency factor was presented to manifest the heterogeneity among them. Meanwhile, the surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities (SUCRA) was utilized to rank the treatments in different outcomes.ResultsFinally, 157 RCTs with 15570 patients were included. A total of eight types DSCIs were identified. Based on the results, Sodium Tanshinone IIA Sulfonate injection (STS) plus western medicine (WM) had better effect on the clinical effectiveness rate, neurological impairment, and activities of daily living function than others. Meanwhile, Danhong injection (DS) and Danshen Salvianolic Acids injection (DSSA) had excellent performance in perfecting hemorheological indexes.ConclusionsIn conclusion, STS plus WM may be the optimum treatment for ACI. The following therapies were DS plus WM and DSSA plus WM. Nevertheless, in terms of the limitations of the study, more large samples, multicenter, and double-blind RCTs are still needed for validating our findings.

Project description:Purpose: This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of Panax notoginseng saponin (PNS) injection, when combined with conventional treatment (CT), for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods: Comprehensive searches were conducted in seven databases from inception until 28 September 2023. The search aimed to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on PNS injection in the context of AMI. This meta-analysis adhered to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, and its protocol was registered with PROSPERO (number: CRD42023480131). Result: Twenty RCTs involving 1,881 patients were included. The meta-analysis revealed that PNS injection, used adjunctively with CT, significantly improved treatment outcomes compared to CT alone, as evidenced by the following points: (1) enhanced total effective rate [OR = 3.09, p < 0.05]; (2) decreased incidence of major adverse cardiac events [OR = 0.32, p < 0.05]; (3) reduction in myocardial infarct size [MD = -6.53, p < 0.05]; (4) lower ST segment elevation amplitude [MD = -0.48, p < 0.05]; (5) mitigated myocardial injury as indicated by decreased levels of creatine kinase isoenzymes [MD = -11.19, p < 0.05], cardiac troponin T [MD = -3.01, p < 0.05], and cardiac troponin I [MD = -10.72, p < 0.05]; (6) enhanced cardiac function, reflected in improved brain natriuretic peptide [MD = -91.57, p < 0.05], left ventricular ejection fraction [MD = 5.91, p < 0.05], left ventricular end-diastolic dimension [MD = -3.08, p < 0.05], and cardiac output [MD = 0.53, p < 0.05]; (7) reduced inflammatory response, as shown by lower levels of C-reactive protein [MD = -2.99, p < 0.05], tumor necrosis factor-α [MD = -6.47, p < 0.05], interleukin-6 [MD = -24.46, p < 0.05], and pentraxin-3 [MD = -2.26, p < 0.05]; (8) improved vascular endothelial function, demonstrated by decreased endothelin-1 [MD = -20.56, p < 0.05] and increased nitric oxide [MD = 1.33, p < 0.05]; (9) alleviated oxidative stress, evidenced by increased superoxide dismutase levels [MD = 25.84, p < 0.05]; (10) no significant difference in adverse events [OR = 1.00, p = 1.00]. Conclusion: This study highlighted the efficacy and safety of adjunctive PNS injections in enhancing AMI patient outcomes beyond CT alone. Future RCTs need to solidify these findings through rigorous methods. Systematic Review Registration: (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/), identifier (CRD42023480131).