Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Li, Dan-Yan
• Dai, Yun-Kai
• Zhang, Yun-Zhan
• Huang, Meng-Xin
• Li, Ru-Liu
• Ou-Yang, Jia
• Chen, Wei-Jing
• Hu, Ling
• Green, John

Titel

Systematic review and meta-analysis of traditional Chinese medicine in the treatment of constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome

Ist Teil von

• PloS one, 2017-12, Vol.12 (12), p.e0189491-e0189491

Ort / Verlag

United States: Public Library of Science

Erscheinungsjahr

2017

Link zum Volltext

Quelle

Free E-Journal (出版社公開部分のみ）

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• This meta-analysis analyzed the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C). We searched seven electronic databases for randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy of TCM in the treatment of IBS-C. The search period was from inception to June 1, 2017. Eligible RCTs compared TCM with cisapride and mosapride. Article quality was evaluated with the Cochrane Risk Bias Tool in the Cochrane Handbook by two independent reviewers. Begg's test was performed to evaluate publication bias. Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 12.0 were used for analyses. Eleven eligible studies comprising a total of 906 participants were identified. In the primary outcome, TCM showed significant improvement in overall clinical efficacy compared with cisapride and mosapride (odds ratio [OR] = 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.74,5.84; P < 0.00001). In terms of secondary outcomes, TCM significantly alleviated abdominal pain (OR = 5.69; 95% CI: 2.35, 13.78; P = 0.0001), defecation frequency (OR = 4.38; 95% CI: 1.93, 9.93. P = 0.0004), and stool form (OR = 4.96; 95% CI: 2.11, 11.65; P = 0.0002) in the treatment group as compared to the control group. A lower recurrence rate was associated with TCM as compared to cisapride and mosapride (OR = 0.15; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.27; P < 0.00001). No adverse effects were observed during TCM treatment. TCM showed greater improvement in terms of clinical efficacy in the treatment of IBS-C than cisapride and mosapride, although it was not possible to draw a definitive conclusion due to the small sample size, high risk, and low quality of the studies. Large multi-center and long-term high-quality randomized control trials are needed.