Skip to main content
. 2018 Sep 27;2018(9):CD001506. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001506.pub4

Summary of findings 5. Hypertonic saline compared with sodium‐2‐mercaptoethane sulphonate (Mistabron®) for cystic fibrosis.

Hypertonic saline compared with sodium‐2‐mercaptoethane sulphonate (Mistabron®) for cystic fibrosis
Patient or population: adults and children with cystic fibrosis
Settings: outpatients
Intervention: hypertonic saline
Comparison: sodium‐2‐mercaptoethane sulphonate
Outcomes Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) Relative effect
 (95% CI) No of participants
 (trials) Quality of the evidence
 (GRADE) Comments
Assumed risk Corresponding risk
Sodium‐2‐mercaptoethane sulphonate Hypertonic saline
FEV1: short term Outcome not reported. NA NA NA  
FEV1: long term Outcome not reported. NA NA NA  
LCI Outcome not reported. NA NA NA  
Mortality Outcome not reported. NA NA NA  
Measures of sputum clearance
Follow‐up: 2 months
No significant difference in sputum volume, colour or cough frequency between the groups. NA 29
 (1 trial) ⊕⊝⊝⊝
 very low1,2,3 Trial had cross‐over design.
Pulmonary exacerbations
Follow‐up: 2 months
See comment. NA 29
 (1 trial) ⊕⊝⊝⊝
 very low1,2,3 Trial had cross‐over design.
The only information provided relevant to this outcome was that there was no change in the number of courses of antibiotics prescribed.
Adverse events
Follow‐up: 2 months
See comment. NA 29
 (1 trial) ⊕⊝⊝⊝
 very low1,2,3 Trial had cross‐over design.
Participants in both treatment groups described coughing at the beginning of their inhalations.
No serious adverse events occurred during the trial.
*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
 CI: confidence interval; FEV1: forced expiratory volume in 1 second; LCI: lung clearance index; NA: not applicable.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
 High quality: further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
 Moderate quality: further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
 Low quality: further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
 Very low quality: we are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 Downgraded once due to risk of bias: high risk of detection bias as participants could discern the taste of the intervention and limited information was provided about the trial design.
 2 Downgraded once due to applicability: results apply only to those who can tolerate hypertonic saline and the trial included only children aged 6 to 15 years so results may not apply to other age groups.
 3 Downgraded once due to imprecision: no numerical data provided and small sample size.