Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410078, China.
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2013;2013:762783. doi: 10.1155/2013/762783. Epub 2013 Mar 21.
Objective. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of radix astragali and its prescriptions for diabetic retinopathy. Methods. A computer-based online and manual search was conducted for randomized controlled trials addressing radix astragali and its prescriptions for diabetic retinopathy. Results. 16 RCTs involving 977 subjects and 1586 eyes were identified. Meta-analysis indicated that the effect of radix astragali and its prescriptions in improving visual acuity and fundus manifestations, lowering FBG, TG, plasma viscosity, and RAI, was superior to that of control group (WMD or OR 0.20, 0.27, -0.26, -0.36, -0.93, -1.27; 95% CI [0.09, 0.30], [0.17, 0.40], [-0.51, 0.00], [-0.60, -0.12], [-1.67, -0.20], [-2.35, -0.19]; P < 0.05, resp.). In contrary, the efficacy of radix astragali and its prescriptions was not superior to those of control group in descending HbA1C and TC with WMD 0.45, -0.96 and 95% CI [-1.00, 1.90], [-2.19, 0.27], P > 0.05, respectively. GRADE software suggested that the studies were of low methodological quality. Conclusion. Radix astragali and its prescriptions were superior to other treatments for diabetic retinopathy in terms of improving visual acuity and fundus manifestations, reducing FBG, TG, RAI, and plasma viscosity. The evaluated studies were of low methodological quality, indicating that the previous findings should be read with care.
评价黄芪及其复方治疗糖尿病视网膜病变的疗效和安全性。
计算机检索和手工检索有关黄芪及其复方治疗糖尿病视网膜病变的随机对照试验。
共纳入 16 项 RCT 研究,涉及 977 例患者和 1586 只眼。Meta 分析结果显示,黄芪及其复方在提高视力和眼底表现、降低 FBG、TG、血浆黏度和 RAI 方面的效果优于对照组(WMD 或 OR 0.20、0.27、-0.26、-0.36、-0.93、-1.27;95%CI[0.09,0.30]、[0.17,0.40]、[-0.51,0.00]、[-0.60,-0.12]、[-1.67,-0.20]、[-2.35,-0.19];P<0.05)。然而,在降低 HbA1C 和 TC 方面,黄芪及其复方的疗效并不优于对照组,WMD 分别为 0.45、-0.96,95%CI 分别为[-1.00,1.90]、[-2.19,0.27],P>0.05。GRADE 软件表明,这些研究的方法学质量较低。
黄芪及其复方在提高视力和眼底表现、降低 FBG、TG、RAI 和血浆黏度方面优于其他治疗方法。由于纳入研究的方法学质量较低,因此对以往研究结果的解读应谨慎。