Literature DB >> 30981461

Efficacy and safety of Shenfu injection for septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Po Huang1, Yuhong Guo2, Shuo Feng3, Guozhen Zhao4, Bo Li5, Qingquan Liu6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Shenfu injection (SFI) combined with standard therapy versus standard therapy for septic shock, three groups of patients with septic shock were analyzed based on the level of mean arterial lactate. They were mean arterial lactate level < 4.5 mmol/L, 4.5 mmol/L ≤ mean arterial lactate level < 7 mmol/L and mean arterial lactate level ≥ 7 mmol/L.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCT) from PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, CENTRAL, SinoMed, Wanfang, CNKI, and Weipu (VIP) databases from the inception to September 2018 were searched. Relative risks (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), along with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were used to analyze the main outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using Rev.Man 5.3. The qualities of the involved studies were accessed by the ROB according to the Cochrane handbook.
RESULTS: 19 randomized controlled trials with 1505 participants were included. Compared with standard therapy, SFI plus standard therapy cannot decrease the 28-day mortality for all of the three groups. Compared with the other two subgroups (mean arterial lactate level < 4.5 mmol/L and mean arterial lactate level ≥ 7 mmol/L), the 4.5 mmol/L ≤ mean arterial lactate level < 7 mmol/L group has a trend to decrease 28-day mortality (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.38-1.19; P = 0.17). In addition, adding SFI could have further increased mean arterial pressure (MAP) at 6-hours (RR: 7.05; 95% CI: 4.14-9.97) and further normalized heart rate (HR) when compared with standard therapy (RR: -17.48; 95% CI: [-19.39-(-15.57)].
CONCLUSION: For septic shock patients with 4.5 mmol/L ≤ mean arterial lactate level < 7 mmol/L, when the Traditional Chinese Medicine syndrome meet Yang-Qi deficiency, clinicians could choose SFI as a supplementary drug. But further high-quality and large-scale RCT should be performed to verify it. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018090320.
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Meta-analysis; Randomized controlled trial; Review; Septic shock; Shenfu injection; Standard therapy

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30981461     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2019.03.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Emerg Med        ISSN: 0735-6757            Impact factor:   2.469


  5 in total

1.  Comparative Efficacy of Tonic Chinese Herbal Injections for Treating Sepsis or Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Lu Xiao; Liqing Niu; Xinyi Xu; Yuetong Zhao; Linkai Yue; Xinqiao Liu; Guiwei Li
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-03-15       Impact factor: 5.810

2.  Therapeutic Mechanism and Key Active Ingredients of Shenfu Injection in Sepsis: A Network Pharmacology and Molecular Docking Approach.

Authors:  Huajing Yuan; Yang Liu; Kai Huang; Hao Hao; Yi-Tao Xue
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2022-08-26       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  Comparative efficacy of Chinese herbal injections for septic shock: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Peiying Huang; Yan Chen; Qiang Liu; Sisi Lei; Yuchao Feng; Qihua Wu; Haobo Zhang; Bojun Chen; Zhongyi Zeng
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-02-04       Impact factor: 1.889

Review 4.  Immunomodulation for Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: The State of the Art.

Authors:  Yinhua Zhang; Yuanyuan Chen; Zhongji Meng
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2020-11-09       Impact factor: 8.786

5.  Effect of shenfu injection on microcirculation in shock patients: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xuemei Zhang; Ting Guo; Kaichen Zhang; Wenhui Guo; Xing An; Peiyang Gao
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 1.817

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.