Evidence Hub

Evaluating the efficacy of N-acetylcysteine in diminishing the duration and frequency of rotavirus-induced gastroenteritis: a preliminary randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial

Behrooz Heydari, Majid Aflatonian, Mina Bagherizadeh, Farahnaz Hoseinzade, Fatemeh Saghafi

BMC Pediatrics, 2025

71 participants

Abstract

Globally, gastroenteritis stands as a primary contributor to child mortality, annually taking the lives of 3 million children under the age of 5 years. Rotavirus, a major factor in viral diarrhea among children aged 6 months to 2 years, presents with severe symptoms such as watery diarrhea and vomiting. Although mortality rates have decreased due to supportive care and vaccines, promising alternatives like N-acetylcysteine (NAC) show potential benefits in laboratory studies, indicating a possible supplementary strategy for managing rotavirus infections by reducing the duration and antigen excretion in feces. During this double-blind clinical trial, 71 patients, confirmed to have gastroenteritis resulting from rotavirus using a rapid diagnostic strip, were randomly allocated to two groups. One group was prescribed NAC at a dosage of 60 mg/kg/day, while the other received a placebo. The patient’s progress was monitored daily until their gastroenteritis improved, and details regarding the duration of diarrhea and the frequency of bowel movements were recorded for each participant. The average duration of diarrhea in the NAC group and the placebo group was 2 and 3 days, respectively, with a level of p = 0.121. During the diarrhea period, the number of bowel movements in the NAC group was recorded at 28.1 ± 21.6 times, whereas in the placebo group, it was 35.3 ± 33.1 times, yielding a p-value of 0.409. Even though the effects of NAC were observed in lowering the duration of the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 71 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free