4.5 Review

Adjuvant treatment with crude rhubarb for patients with acute organophosphorus pesticide poisoning: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

期刊

COMPLEMENTARY THERAPIES IN MEDICINE
卷 23, 期 6, 页码 794-801

出版社

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2015.09.001

关键词

Crude rhubarb; Acute organophosphorus pesticide poisoning; Effects; Randomized controlled trials; Meta-analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Crude rhubarb has been used to treat critically ill patients for many years. However, no previous meta-analysis has been investigated the benefits of crude rhubarb in patients with acute organophosphorus pesticide poisoning (AOPP). Objective: To summarize the beneficial effects of adjuvant treatment with crude rhubarb in patients with AOPP by conducting a meta-analysis. Methods: A literature search of the databases through Pubmed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP, and Wanfang were performed for studies published up to October 2014. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of crude rhubarb as adjuvant treatment for patients with AOPP were included. Results: A total of 12 RCTs with 886 patients were identified. Adjuvant treatment with crude rhubarb was associated with a significantly lower incidence of intermediate syndrome (risk ratio [RR] 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10-0.48), as well as multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.20-0.56). Crude rhubarb as adjuvant treatment reduced the total dose of pralidoxime (mean difference [MD] -5.12 g; 95% CI -8.24 to -2.00) or atropine (MD -94.89 mg; 95% CI -156.22 to -33.57), and hospital length of stay (MD -2.79 days; 95% CI -4.19 to -1.39) compared with the controls. Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that crude rhubarb as adjuvant treatment appears to have additional beneficial effects in patients with AOPP. More well-designed trials are needed to confirm our findings due to the methodological flaws of the included trials. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据