Dataset Information

The efficacy and safety of combined chinese herbal medicine and western medicine therapy for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) with and without Western medicine (WM) for different severity of COVID-19.

Methods

CNKI, PubMed, Wanfang Database, ClinicalTrails.gov, Embase, ChiCTR and ICTRP were searched from 01 Jan, 2020 to 30 Jun, 2021. Two authors independently assessed all the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for trial inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software (RevMan 5.4.1). Evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcomes included total effectiveness rate. Secondary outcomes included improvements in symptom improvement and total adverse event rate. Different severity of COVID-19 patients was assessed in subgroup analysis. This study was registered with INPLASY, INPLASY202210072.

Results

22 high quality RCTs involving 1789 participants were included. There were no trial used CHM alone nor compare placebo or no treatment. Compared with WM, combined CHM and WM (CHM-WM) treatment showed higher total effectiveness rate, lower symptom scores of fever, cough, fatigue, dry throat and pharyngalgia, shorter mean time to viral conversion, better Computerized Tomography (CT) image and blood results, fewer total adverse events and worse conditions (P < 0.05). Subgroup analysis showed that the total effectiveness rate of combined CHM-WM group was significantly higher than WM group, especially for mild and moderate patients. No significant differences in mortality and adverse events were found between combined CHM-WM and WM treatment. No serious adverse events and long-term outcomes were reported.

Conclusion

Current evidence supported the therapeutic effects and safety of combined CHM-WM treatment on COVID-19, especially for patients with mild and moderate symptoms. Long-term effects of therapy are worthy in further study.

SUBMITTER: Li L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9210065 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The efficacy and safety of combined chinese herbal medicine and western medicine therapy for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Li Lu L Xie Hongliang H Wang Ling L Zhang Aolin A Mou Xuan X Lin Yifan Y Ma Hongli H Wang Yu Y Li Jian J Gao Jingshu J Wang Chi Chiu CC Leung Ping Chung PC Fan Xiaohui X Wu Xiaoke X

Chinese medicine 20220621 1

<h4>Objective</h4>To systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) with and without Western medicine (WM) for different severity of COVID-19.<h4>Methods</h4>CNKI, PubMed, Wanfang Database, ClinicalTrails.gov, Embase, ChiCTR and ICTRP were searched from 01 Jan, 2020 to 30 Jun, 2021. Two authors independently assessed all the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for trial inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment. Meta-analysis was conducted using Rev ...[more]

PMID: 35729581

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAnkylosing spondylitis (AS) is a chronic progressive inflammatory disease of the spine, which mainly invades the sacroiliac joint, spine, and large joints near the trunk, leading to fibrous and skeletal ankylosis and deformity, and can cause damage to the eyes, lung, cardiovascular, kidney and other organs. Chinese herbal formulas (CHF) is an important interventions of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), and CHFs combined with western medicine are widely used in clinical practice to treat AS.MethodsEight databases will be systematically retrieved from their inceptions to March 2021. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CHFs combined with western medicine for AS treatment will meet the inclusion criteria. The primary outcomes we focus on include clinical effectiveness rate, TCM syndrome score, TCM symptom score, Bath ankylosing spondylitis disease activity index (BASDAI), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI), chest expansion, nocturnal spinal pain, adverse reactions, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C protein response (CRP). The research screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment will be performed independently by 2 researchers, and divergence will be solved by a third researcher. Revman 5.3 software will be used for meta-analysis. The confidence of evidence will be graded using grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) algorithm and methodological quality will be assessed adopting risk of bias in systematic reviews (ROBIS).ResultsThis systematic review (SR) will provide evidence-based medical evidence for AS therapy by CHF combined with western medicine and we will submit the findings of this SR for peer-review publication.ConclusionsThis SR will provide latest and updated summary proof for assessing the effectiveness and safety of CHF combined with western medicine for AS.Registration numberINPLASY 202150089.

Project description:BackgroundDiabetic kidney disease (DKD) is the most important cause of the end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and the main cause of renal replacement therapy. Excessive inflammatory response and renal fibrosis are the keys to the development of this disease, and the conventional Western medical treatment is difficult to achieve and obtain long-term stable clinical results in all patients with DKD. Many studies have shown that Chinese medicine as a complementary and alternative medicine may be another therapeutic option to mitigate the progression of DKD to ESRD. In recent years, many doctors have used the Bushen Huoxue therapy to assist Western medicine in the treatment of the disease and have achieved certain clinical effects. However, most of the current studies are small sample studies, and there is no evidence-based confirmation.ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Bushen Huoxue therapy combined with conventional Western medicine in the treatment of DKD.MethodsA comprehensive search of literature databases such as CNKI, Wanfang, Pubmed, and Cochrane Library was conducted. The screening condition was that the control group was treated with conventional Western medicine and the experimental group was treated with Bushen Huoxue therapy's RCT on top of the control group, and the RCTs were published from January 2011 to October 2021. The Cochrane risk bias assessment tool was used for literature quality evaluation, and RevMan 5.3 software was used for statistical analysis.ResultsA total of 23 RCTs were finally included, with a total of 2,105 patients. Meta-analysis results show that the experimental group can effectively improve the clinical efficacy (RR = 1.28, 95% CI (1.22, 1.34), P < 0.01), significantly reduce Crea (SMD = -0.45, 95% CI (-0.57, -0.33), P < 0.01), 24 h UTP (SMD = -0.57, 95% CI (-0.69, -0.45), P < 0.01), BUN (SMD = -0.36, 95%CI (-0.48, -0.24), P < 0.01), UAER (SMD = -1.58, 95% CI (-1.78, -1.37), P < 0.01), and blood sugar, and have certain medication safety (RR = 0.00, 95% CI (-0.03, 0.03), P=0.87).ConclusionsChinese medicine based on the Bushen Huoxue therapy has a good clinical effect in the treatment of diabetic kidney disease and has certain safety. However, due to the limitation of the quality and quantity of the included literature, the above conclusion still needs more rational experiments to further verify.

Project description:Background and aims: Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) was used to prevent and treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in clinical practices. Many studies have demonstrated that the combination of CHM and Western medicine can be more effective in treating COVID-19 compared to Western medicine alone. However, evidence-based studies on the prevention in undiagnosed or suspected cases remain scarce. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness of CHM in preventing recurrent, new, or suspected COVID-19 diseases. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search using ten databases including articles published between December 2019 and September 2023. This search aimed to identify studies investigating the use of CHM to prevent COVID-19. Heterogeneity was assessed by a random-effects model. The relative risk (RR) and mean differences were calculated using 95% confidence intervals (CI). The modified Jadad Scale and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) were employed to evaluate the quality of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies, respectively. Results: Seventeen studies with a total of 47,351 patients were included. Results revealed that CHM significantly reduced the incidence of COVID-19 (RR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.11-0.53, p = 0.0004), influenza (RR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.18-0.76, p = 0.007), and severe pneumonia exacerbation rate (RR = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.05-0.64, p = 0.009) compared to non-treatment or conventional control group. Evidence evaluation indicated moderate quality evidence for COVID-19 incidence and serum complement components C3 and C4 in randomized controlled trials. For the incidence of influenza and severe pneumonia in RCTs as well as the ratio of CD4+/CD8+ lymphocytes, the evidence quality was low. The remaining outcomes including the disappearance rate of symptoms and adverse reactions were deemed to be of very low quality. Conclusion: CHM presents a promising therapeutic option for the prevention of COVID-19. However, additional high-quality clinical trials are needed to further strengthen evidential integrity.

Project description:Background: Acute tonsillitis has high morbidity. Chinese herbal injections (CHIs) were reported to be useful in treating acute tonsillitis and might reduce the probability of antibiotic resistance. Nevertheless, the optimal strategy for combining CHIs with western medicine (WM) to treat acute tonsillitis remains unclear. Methods: We retrieved data from the following databases with retrieval time from inception to 11 January 2022: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, Weipu Journal Database, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database. Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (ROB2) was used for evaluating the quality of the included studies. R 4.1.2, STATA 14.0, and Python 3.10.4 were employed for network meta-analysis, with 5-dimensional K-means cluster analysis, meta-regression analyses, sensitivity analyses, and subgroup analyses. Results: A total of 110 randomized controlled trials including 12,152 patients were included. All the studies were rated as "high risk" and "some concerns". In terms of improving clinical effectiveness rate, Qingkailing injection + WM ranked ahead of other interventions (89.51%). Regarding reducing antipyretic time, Reduning injection + WM had the highest-ranking probability (68.48%). As for shortening sore throat relief time, Shuanghuanglian injection + WM ranked first (76.82%). Concerning shortening red and swollen tonsils relief time, Yanhuning injection + WM possessed the highest-ranking probability (89.17%). In terms of reducing tonsillar exudate relief time, Xuebijing injection + WM ranked ahead of the other interventions (94.82%). Additionally, the results of the cluster analysis suggested that Xuebijing injection + WM, Reduning injection + WM, and Yanhuning injection + WM were probably the best interventions. Furthermore, adverse drug reactions rate of Xuebijing injection + WM, Reduning injection + WM, Yanhuning injection + WM, Qingkailing injection + WM, and Shuanghuanglian injection + WM were individually 0.00%, 3.11%, 3.08%, 4.29%, and 4.62%. Conclusions: CHIs + WM have a better impact on patients with acute tonsillitis than WM alone. Xuebijing injection, Reduning injection, and Yanhuning injection might have potential advantages in treating the disease. Concerning adverse drug reactions, Xuebijing injection is presumably the optimal CHI. More high-quality studies are needed to further confirm our findings. Systematic Review Registration: CRD42022303243; URL= https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=303243.

Project description:Background: Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has the advantage of being safe and effective and has been widely used in clinical practice for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with hyperuricemia (HUA), but its overall efficacy and safety remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CHM for the treatment of T2DM with HUA based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide clinical evidence. Methods: The protocol evaluated in this study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022351519). As of November 2022, eight databases were searched, and RCTs of CHM for the treatment of T2DM with HUA were included. Outcome indicators observed included fasting blood glucose (FBG), 2-h postprandial glucose (2hPG), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), uric acid (UA), triglycerides (TG), total cholesterol (TC), overall effectiveness, and adverse events. Utilizing Review Manager 5.4, Stata V14.0, and GRADEpro, the included studies were evaluated, and the quality of the evidence was determined. Results: 18 RCTs covering 1,311 patients were included in this study. The results of the study demonstrated that the combination of CHM and western medicine (WM) was more effective in treating patients with T2DM with HUA than WM alone, with significant improvements in FBG (weighted mean differences (WMD) = -0.60.95% confidence interval (CI) [-0.81, -0.40], p < 0.00001), 2hPG (WMD = -1.12.95% CI [-1.64, -0.60], p < 0.0001), HbA1c (WMD = -0.80.95% CI [-1.04, -0.56], p < 0.00001), UA (WMD = -53.47.95% CI [-67.45, -39.48], p < 0.00001), TG (WMD = -0.56.95% CI [-0.74, -0.38], p < 0.00001), TC (WMD = -0.49.95% CI [-0.65, -0.33], p < 0.00001), and overall effective rate (risk ratio (RR) = 1.29.95%CI [1.13, 1.48], p = 0.0002). The quality of evidence for all outcomes was low. Conclusion: Compared with WM alone, the combination of CHM and WM was more effective in treating patients with T2DM with HUA, with significant improvements in glucose metabolism, uric acid, and lipids. However, further evaluation by high-quality RCT results is needed due to the low quality and high heterogeneity of the evidence. Systematic Review Registration: [https://systematicreview.gov/], identifier [CRD42022351519].

Project description:Objective: To present the evidence of the therapeutic effects and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) used with or without conventional western therapy for COVID-19. Methods: Clinical studies on the therapeutic effects and safety of CHM for COVID-19 were included. We summarized the general characteristics of included studies, evaluated methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, analyzed the use of CHM, used Revman 5.4 software to present the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) to estimate the therapeutic effects and safety of CHM. Results: A total of 58 clinical studies were identified including RCTs (17.24%, 10), non-randomized controlled trials (1.72%, 1), retrospective studies with a control group (18.97%, 11), case-series (20.69%, 12) and case-reports (41.38%, 24). No RCTs of high methodological quality were identified. The most frequently tested oral Chinese patent medicine, Chinese herbal medicine injection or prescribed herbal decoction were: Lianhua Qingwen granule/capsule, Xuebijing injection and Maxing Shigan Tang. In terms of aggravation rate, pooled analyses showed that there were statistical differences between the intervention group and the comparator group (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.82, six RCTs; RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.64, five retrospective studies with a control group), that is, CHM plus conventional western therapy appeared better than conventional western therapy alone in reducing aggravation rate. In addition, compared with conventional western therapy, CHM plus conventional western therapy had potential advantages in increasing the recovery rate and shortening the duration of fever, cough and fatigue, improving the negative conversion rate of nucleic acid test, and increasing the improvement rate of chest CT manifestations and shortening the time from receiving the treatment to the beginning of chest CT manifestations improvement. For adverse events, pooled data showed that there were no statistical differences between the CHM and the control groups. Conclusion: Current low certainty evidence suggests that there maybe a tendency that CHM plus conventional western therapy is superior to conventional western therapy alone. The use of CHM did not increase the risk of adverse events.

Dataset Information

The efficacy and safety of combined chinese herbal medicine and western medicine therapy for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The efficacy and safety of combined chinese herbal medicine and western medicine therapy for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets