ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2020
Chinese Herbal Injections for Primary Nephrotic Syndrome in Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Programmed Cell Death: A Key Mechanism of Traditional Chinese Medicine in the Treatment of Membranous Nephropathy.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Review
- Efficacy and safety of Bailing Capsule for the treatment of adult primary nephrotic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Primary nephrotic syndrome (PNS) is a common renal disease that presents with heavy proteinuria and hypoalbuminemia. Despite notable advances in its treatment, some patients show poor responses and clinical outcomes when treated with conventional Western medicine (WM). Chinese herbal injections (CHIs) have been reported to have beneficial effects for PNS. The aim of the present study was to comprehensively determine the efficacy and safety of CHIs for PNS in adults using a network meta-analysis approach. PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane library, and four Chinese databases were systematically searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using CHIs for treatment of PNS published before June 1, 2019. Quality assessment of the identified RCTs was performed according to the Cochrane Handbook. Pooled odds ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for discrete or continuous variables, respectively. The primary outcome was complete/total remission and secondary outcomes were serum albumin and urinary protein excretion. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value and cluster analyses were used to rank treatment by probability. Eighty-five studies involving 11 CHIs and 5801 subjects were included. Compared with WM alone, CHI plus WM showed an improved complete/total remission rate as well as higher serum albumin and lower 24-hour urinary protein excretion, except in the following: Yinxingye injection plus WM did not improve the total remission rate, and Dengzhanhua or Xueshuantong injection plus WM did not lower the 24-hour urinary protein excretion. Either Danhong (DH) or Dengzhanhua (DZH) injection plus WM was the preferable treatment for PNS based on SUCRA and cluster analyses of clinical remission and adverse events. However, considering that literature in this area is limited, these results need further validation. CHIs administered as adjuvants to WM showed favourable outcomes for PNS. DH + WM and DZH + WM might be the potential optimal therapies for PNS.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.