Effectiveness of hypertonic saline with or without hyaluronic acid among patients with cystic fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.7 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Annals of Medicine and Surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-30 eCollection Date: 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1097/MS9.0000000000002450
Zarghuna Khan, Muhammad O Naeem, Dr Anam Amin, Laraib Amin, Abdullah Shah, Saad Ul Khaliq, Aima Azhar, Sana Naz, Syed M Shujauddin, Muhammad A Arshad, Sarosh J Ali, Emad U Sajid, Sayed Jawad
{"title":"Effectiveness of hypertonic saline with or without hyaluronic acid among patients with cystic fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Zarghuna Khan, Muhammad O Naeem, Dr Anam Amin, Laraib Amin, Abdullah Shah, Saad Ul Khaliq, Aima Azhar, Sana Naz, Syed M Shujauddin, Muhammad A Arshad, Sarosh J Ali, Emad U Sajid, Sayed Jawad","doi":"10.1097/MS9.0000000000002450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The clinical effectiveness of hypertonic saline (HS) in individuals with cystic fibrosis (CF) can be compromised by adverse effects. The objective of this study was to examine the efficacy of hyaluronic acid (HA) in mitigating these negative occurrences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive review of the literature was carried out using three electronic databases: Medline, Cochrane Central, and Embase. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigate the efficacy of hypertonic saline (HS) with and without hyaluronic acid (HA) in treating cystic fibrosis. Primary outcomes include the incidence of cough, throat irritation, unpleasant taste, and changes in FEV1. Our findings suggest that adding HA to HS significantly reduces adverse effects and enhances patient tolerability, marking a potential improvement in cystic fibrosis therapy. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% CI were used to present evaluations. The quality of RCTs was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (CRBT). The quality of the observational study was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From the 1960 articles retrieved from the initial search, five relevant studies (<i>n</i>=236 patients) were included in the final analysis. Compared with patients only on HS, patients with HS and HA were significantly less likely to experience cough (RR: 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.72, <i>P</i>=0.001), throat irritation (RR: 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.81, <i>P</i>=0.009), and unpleasant smell (RR: 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23-0.80, <i>P</i>=0.09). In addition, patients with HS with HA had significantly less forced expiratory volume (FEV1) (MD: -2.97; 95% CI, -3.79--2.15, <i>P</i>=0.52), compared to patients only on HS. Patients on HA + HS had significantly lower rates of cough (RR: 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.72, <i>P</i>=0.001), throat irritation (RR: 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.81, <i>P</i>=0.009), and bad smell (RR: 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23-0.80, <i>P</i>=0.09) when compared to patients on HS alone. Furthermore, compared to patients solely on HS, patients with HS plus HA exhibited a substantially lower forced expiratory volume (FEV1) (MD: -2.97; 95% CI, -3.79 to -2.15, <i>P</i>=0.52) as well.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For CF patients who need ongoing HS therapy and have a history of poor therapy tolerance, adding HA is beneficial.</p>","PeriodicalId":8025,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Medicine and Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11444569/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Medicine and Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MS9.0000000000002450","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The clinical effectiveness of hypertonic saline (HS) in individuals with cystic fibrosis (CF) can be compromised by adverse effects. The objective of this study was to examine the efficacy of hyaluronic acid (HA) in mitigating these negative occurrences.

Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature was carried out using three electronic databases: Medline, Cochrane Central, and Embase. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigate the efficacy of hypertonic saline (HS) with and without hyaluronic acid (HA) in treating cystic fibrosis. Primary outcomes include the incidence of cough, throat irritation, unpleasant taste, and changes in FEV1. Our findings suggest that adding HA to HS significantly reduces adverse effects and enhances patient tolerability, marking a potential improvement in cystic fibrosis therapy. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% CI were used to present evaluations. The quality of RCTs was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (CRBT). The quality of the observational study was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Results: From the 1960 articles retrieved from the initial search, five relevant studies (n=236 patients) were included in the final analysis. Compared with patients only on HS, patients with HS and HA were significantly less likely to experience cough (RR: 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.72, P=0.001), throat irritation (RR: 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.81, P=0.009), and unpleasant smell (RR: 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23-0.80, P=0.09). In addition, patients with HS with HA had significantly less forced expiratory volume (FEV1) (MD: -2.97; 95% CI, -3.79--2.15, P=0.52), compared to patients only on HS. Patients on HA + HS had significantly lower rates of cough (RR: 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.72, P=0.001), throat irritation (RR: 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.81, P=0.009), and bad smell (RR: 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23-0.80, P=0.09) when compared to patients on HS alone. Furthermore, compared to patients solely on HS, patients with HS plus HA exhibited a substantially lower forced expiratory volume (FEV1) (MD: -2.97; 95% CI, -3.79 to -2.15, P=0.52) as well.

Conclusion: For CF patients who need ongoing HS therapy and have a history of poor therapy tolerance, adding HA is beneficial.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
高渗盐水加或不加透明质酸对囊性纤维化患者的疗效:系统综述和荟萃分析。
背景:高渗盐水(HS)对囊性纤维化(CF)患者的临床疗效可能会受到不良反应的影响。本研究旨在探讨透明质酸(HA)在减轻这些不良反应方面的功效:方法:使用三个电子数据库对文献进行了全面审查:Medline、Cochrane Central 和 Embase。本系统综述和荟萃分析调查了含或不含透明质酸(HA)的高渗盐水(HS)治疗囊性纤维化的疗效。主要结果包括咳嗽发生率、咽喉刺激、异味和 FEV1 的变化。我们的研究结果表明,在 HS 中添加 HA 可显著减少不良反应,提高患者的耐受性,这标志着囊性纤维化治疗的潜在改进。评估采用风险比(RRs)和平均差(MDs)以及 95% CI。采用科克伦偏倚风险工具(Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool,CRBT)对研究性临床试验的质量进行评估。观察性研究的质量采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表进行评估:在最初检索到的 1960 篇文章中,有 5 项相关研究(n=236 名患者)被纳入最终分析。与只服用 HS 的患者相比,服用 HS 和 HA 的患者出现咳嗽(RR:0.45;95% CI:0.28-0.72,P=0.001)、咽喉不适(RR:0.43;95% CI:0.22-0.81,P=0.009)和难闻气味(RR:0.43;95% CI:0.23-0.80,P=0.09)的几率明显降低。此外,与只服用 HS 的患者相比,服用 HA 的 HS 患者的用力呼气容积(FEV1)明显减少(MD:-2.97;95% CI:-3.79--2.15,P=0.52)。与单纯服用 HS 的患者相比,服用 HA + HS 的患者的咳嗽(RR:0.45;95% CI:0.28-0.72,P=0.001)、咽喉刺激(RR:0.43;95% CI:0.22-0.81,P=0.009)和异味(RR:0.43;95% CI:0.23-0.80,P=0.09)发生率明显降低。此外,与单纯使用 HS 的患者相比,使用 HS 加 HA 的患者的用力呼气容积(FEV1)也大大降低(MD:-2.97;95% CI,-3.79 至 -2.15,P=0.52):对于需要持续接受 HS 治疗且治疗耐受性较差的 CF 患者来说,添加 HA 是有益的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Medicine and Surgery
Annals of Medicine and Surgery MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
5.90%
发文量
1665
期刊最新文献
Coexistence of Cecal duplication cyst and Meckel's diverticulum presenting as intestinal obstruction: a rare case report: Retraction. Bladder transitional cell carcinoma anatomic primary site as a predictor of survival and mortality: a population-based retrospective cohort study. Male breast cancer: a 32-year retrospective analysis in radiation therapy referral center in northern Iran. Bilateral visual loss as the initial presentation of chronic myeloid leukemia: a case report. Unveiling post-COVID-19 Rasmussen's encephalitis: a case report of rare neurological complication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1