Ernst E
Department of Complementary Medicine, School of Postgraduate Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Exeter, United Kingdom.
Am Heart J. 2000 Jul;140(1):139-41. doi: 10.1067/mhj.2000.107548.
Chelation therapy is popular in the United States. The question of whether it does more good than harm remains controversial.
The aim of this systematic review was to summarize all the clinical evidence for or against the effectiveness and efficacy of chelation therapy for coronary heart disease.
A thorough search strategy was implemented to retrieve all clinical investigations regardless of whether they were controlled or uncontrolled.
The most striking finding is the almost total lack of convincing evidence for efficacy. Numerous case reports and case series were found. The majority of these publications seem to indicate that chelation therapy is effective. Only 2 controlled clinical trials were located. They provide no evidence that chelation therapy is efficacious beyond a powerful placebo effect.
Given the potential of chelation therapy to cause severe adverse effects, this treatment should now be considered obsolete.
螯合疗法在美国很流行。其利弊之争仍存在争议。
本系统评价旨在总结支持或反对螯合疗法治疗冠心病有效性和疗效的所有临床证据。
实施全面的检索策略,检索所有临床研究,无论其是否为对照研究。
最显著的发现是几乎完全缺乏令人信服的疗效证据。发现了大量病例报告和病例系列。这些出版物中的大多数似乎表明螯合疗法是有效的。仅找到2项对照临床试验。它们没有提供证据表明螯合疗法除了强大的安慰剂效应外还有效。
鉴于螯合疗法有导致严重不良反应的可能性,现在应认为这种治疗方法已过时。