| Title |
Umbilical cord blood stem cells transplantation as an adjunctive treatment strategy for liver cirrhosis in Chinese population: a meta-analysis of effectiveness and safety
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s157603 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Huimin Tao, Yafeng Li, Tingting Wang, Changhui Zhou |
| Abstract |
The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of umbilical cord blood stem cells (USCs) transplantation combined with routine supportive therapy (RST) for liver cirrhosis (LC). Clinical trials involved in this research were searched from Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Wanfang and CNKI database. Treatment effects, quality of life (QoL), adverse events and other outcome measures were extracted and evaluated. A total of 10 trials including 616 LC patients were involved in this study. Based on our analysis, the liver function of LC patients was significantly improved after USCs transplantation and RST combined therapy, indicated by decreased total bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase levels and prothrombin time and increased serum albumin level and prothrombin activity. Compared to those treated by RST alone, patients treated by combined therapy showed more satisfied treatment effects, improved QoL reflected by improved appetite (odds ratio [OR]=5.43, 95% CI=2.84 to 10.38, P<0.00001) and relieved fatigue (OR=4.33, 95% CI=0.87 to 21.60, P=0.07), ascetic fluid (OR=4.56, 95% CI=2.69 to 7.74, P<0.00001), abdominal distension (OR=4.01, 95% CI=1.34 to 12.02, P=0.01) and edema (OR=2.69, 95% CI=0.23 to 31.72, P=0.43). No serious adverse events occurred during USCs therapy. USCs transplantation is a safe and effective adjuvant therapy for RST-treated LC, possibly through improving patients' liver function. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 32% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 7 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 February 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#1,020
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#324,918
of 448,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#26
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 448,849 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.