MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.3389/fmed.2026.1917060

Медицинская библиотека · Frontiers in medicine · 2026

Comparative efficacy and safety of intravenous versus nebulized magnesium sulfate for acute asthma exacerbations: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Wang Yongji, Wang Zhuang, Cui Shengtao, Hou Lijie, Tian Bing, Xie Xiaofei, Song Yongfu, Liu Shulei, Wang Ying

СтатьяСистематический обзорПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to conduct an umbrella review comparing intravenous versus nebulized magnesium sulfate for acute asthma exacerbations, providing evidence to guide route selection and clinical decision-making.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, WANFANG, and CBM from inception to August 2025, for systematic reviews/meta analyses comparing intravenous versus nebulized magnesium sulfate for acute asthma exacerbations. Overlap among primary studies was assessed using a citation matrix and corrected covered area. Quality assessment was performed using ROBIS, AMSTAR-2, PRISMA 2020, and GRADE. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of primary outcomes were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 18 systematic reviews/meta analyses were included. The corrected covered area was 5.168%, indicating some overlap in primary studies. ROBIS judged all studies at low risk of bias. AMSTAR-2 rated 6 studies as high quality, 2 as moderate, and 10 as low. PRISMA 2020 scores ranged from 25.5 to 41, with 10 studies of high and 8 of moderate reporting quality. GRADE yielded 13 high-quality, 38 moderate-quality, 27 low-quality, and 26 extremely low-quality outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This overview clarifies the role of intravenous magnesium sulfate in acute asthma: not for routine use but as secondary adjunctive therapy for severe cases refractory to first-line treatment. The role of nebulized magnesium sulfate is more complex-neither universally applicable nor a replacement for first-line medications. Current evidence does not support routine use, warranting only a weak recommendation for patients who fail standard therapy. Future research should focus on its synergistic effects with other therapies and further elucidate its mechanisms.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, PROSPERO: CRD420251122150.

Для цитирования: Wang Yongji, Wang Zhuang, Cui Shengtao, Hou Lijie, Tian Bing, Xie Xiaofei, Song Yongfu, Liu Shulei, Wang Ying. Comparative efficacy and safety of intravenous versus nebulized magnesium sulfate for acute asthma exacerbations: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.. Frontiers in medicine. 2026. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2026.1917060.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.