科研速览 · Science Skim继续刷下去 · Keep skimming →
◆ Frontiers in medicine2026-01-01

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

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

一句话结论 · In one sentence

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.

原始摘要(英文原文)· Original abstract
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.
读原文 · Read the paper ↗

AI 追问PRO

登录后使用 AI 追问

讨论区

登录后参与讨论

相关论文 · Related

Comparative efficacy and safety of intravenous versus nebulized magnesium sulfate for acute asthma exacerbations: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. — 科研速览 Science Skim