Meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of fresh frozen plasma exchange in the treatment of organophosphate pesticide poisoning.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 TOXICOLOGY
Critical Reviews in Toxicology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-29 DOI:10.1080/10408444.2025.2540432
Binrong Cai, Xian Yu, Xiaoyan Xian, Lipeng Liu, Bin He, Shuyun Xu
{"title":"Meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of fresh frozen plasma exchange in the treatment of organophosphate pesticide poisoning.","authors":"Binrong Cai, Xian Yu, Xiaoyan Xian, Lipeng Liu, Bin He, Shuyun Xu","doi":"10.1080/10408444.2025.2540432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study evaluates whether fresh frozen plasma (FFP) improves outcomes compared to conventional therapy alone in organophosphorus poisoning (OP). Relevant literature was searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases, applying predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria to select studies. Data from included studies were extracted for analysis. Seven randomized clinical trials involving 391 patients were included in the analysis, with 191 patients in the FFP combined with conventional therapy group (combination therapy group) and 200 patients in the conventional therapy alone group (control group). Compared with the control group, the combination therapy group demonstrated a lower case fatality rate (relative risk (RR) = 0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.34, 0.97], <i>p</i> < .05), reduced utilization of mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.78, 95% CI [0.64, 0.95], <i>p</i> < .05), and superior cholinesterase recovery levels (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.70, 95% CI [-0.02, 3.43], <i>p</i> = .05). However, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in hospitalization duration or ICU length, incidence of intermediate syndrome, and duration of mechanical ventilation maintenance (<i>p</i> > .05). Current evidence indicates that FFP combined with conventional therapy may reduce mortality rates, mechanical ventilation utilization, and enhance cholinesterase activity recovery levels in OP patients. Nevertheless, multicenter randomized double-blind controlled trials remain necessary to validate these findings in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":10869,"journal":{"name":"Critical Reviews in Toxicology","volume":" ","pages":"707-715"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Reviews in Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10408444.2025.2540432","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study evaluates whether fresh frozen plasma (FFP) improves outcomes compared to conventional therapy alone in organophosphorus poisoning (OP). Relevant literature was searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases, applying predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria to select studies. Data from included studies were extracted for analysis. Seven randomized clinical trials involving 391 patients were included in the analysis, with 191 patients in the FFP combined with conventional therapy group (combination therapy group) and 200 patients in the conventional therapy alone group (control group). Compared with the control group, the combination therapy group demonstrated a lower case fatality rate (relative risk (RR) = 0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.34, 0.97], p < .05), reduced utilization of mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.78, 95% CI [0.64, 0.95], p < .05), and superior cholinesterase recovery levels (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.70, 95% CI [-0.02, 3.43], p = .05). However, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in hospitalization duration or ICU length, incidence of intermediate syndrome, and duration of mechanical ventilation maintenance (p > .05). Current evidence indicates that FFP combined with conventional therapy may reduce mortality rates, mechanical ventilation utilization, and enhance cholinesterase activity recovery levels in OP patients. Nevertheless, multicenter randomized double-blind controlled trials remain necessary to validate these findings in the future.

新鲜冷冻血浆置换治疗有机磷农药中毒的安全性和有效性meta分析。
本研究评估新鲜冷冻血浆(FFP)与常规治疗相比是否能改善有机磷中毒(OP)的预后。检索PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、Cochrane Library、中国知网(CNKI)、万方网(Wanfang)、VIP等数据库的相关文献,采用预设的纳入/排除标准进行筛选。从纳入的研究中提取数据进行分析。纳入7项随机临床试验391例患者,其中FFP联合常规治疗组191例(联合治疗组),单纯常规治疗组200例(对照组)。与对照组相比,联合治疗组病死率较低(相对危险度(RR) = 0.58, 95%可信区间[CI] [0.34, 0.97], p p p = 0.05)。两组患者住院时间、ICU时间、中间综合征发生率、机械通气维持时间差异无统计学意义(p < 0.05)。目前的证据表明,FFP联合常规治疗可降低OP患者的死亡率、机械通气利用率,并提高胆碱酯酶活性恢复水平。然而,未来仍需要多中心随机双盲对照试验来验证这些发现。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
1.70%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Critical Reviews in Toxicology provides up-to-date, objective analyses of topics related to the mechanisms of action, responses, and assessment of health risks due to toxicant exposure. The journal publishes critical, comprehensive reviews of research findings in toxicology and the application of toxicological information in assessing human health hazards and risks. Toxicants of concern include commodity and specialty chemicals such as formaldehyde, acrylonitrile, and pesticides; pharmaceutical agents of all types; consumer products such as macronutrients and food additives; environmental agents such as ambient ozone; and occupational exposures such as asbestos and benzene.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信