Cameron Melainie, Chrubasik Sigrun
School ofHealth and Sport Sciences,University of the SunshineCoast,MaroochydoreDC, Australia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 May 31;2013(5):CD010538. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010538.
Before extraction and synthetic chemistry were invented, musculoskeletal complaints were treated with preparations from medicinal plants. They were either administered orally or topically. In contrast to the oral medicinal plant products, topicals act in part as counterirritants or are toxic when given orally.
To update the previous Cochrane review of herbal therapy for osteoarthritis from 2000 by evaluating the evidence on effectiveness for topical medicinal plant products.
Databases for mainstream and complementary medicine were searched using terms to include all forms of arthritis combined with medicinal plant products. We searched electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, ISI Web of Science, World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform) to February 2013, unrestricted by language. We also searched the reference lists from retrieved trials.
Randomised controlled trials of herbal interventions used topically, compared with inert (placebo) or active controls, in people with osteoarthritis were included.
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias of included studies and extracted data.
Seven studies (six different medicinal plant interventions; 785 participants) were included. Single studies (five studies) and non-comparable studies (two studies) precluded pooling of results.Moderate evidence from a single study of 174 people with hand osteoarthritis indicated that treatment with Arnica extract gel probably results in similar benefits as treatment with ibuprofen (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug) with a similar number of adverse events. Mean pain in the ibuprofen group was 44.2 points on a 100 point scale; treatment with Arnica gel reduced the pain by 4 points after three weeks: mean difference (MD) -3.8 points (95% confidence intervals (CI) -10.1 to 2.5), absolute reduction 4% (10% reduction to 3% increase). Hand function was 7.5 points on a 30 point scale in the ibuprofen-treated group; treatment with Arnica gel reduced function by 0.4 points (MD -0.4, 95% CI -1.75 to 0.95), absolute improvement 1% (6% improvement to 3% decline)). Total adverse events were higher in the Arnica gel group (13% compared to 8% in the ibuprofen group): relative risk (RR) 1.65 (95% CI 0.72 to 3.76).Moderate quality evidence from a single trial of 99 people with knee osteoarthritis indicated that compared with placebo, Capsicum extract gel probably does not improve pain or knee function, and is commonly associated with treatment-related adverse events including skin irritation and a burning sensation. At four weeks follow-up, mean pain in the placebo group was 46 points on a 100 point scale; treatment with Capsicum extract reduced pain by 1 point (MD -1, 95% CI -6.8 to 4.8), absolute reduction of 1% (7% reduction to 5% increase). Mean knee function in the placebo group was 34.8 points on a 96 point scale at four weeks; treatment with Capsicum extract improved function by a mean of 2.6 points (MD -2.6, 95% CI -9.5 to 4.2), an absolute improvement of 3% (10% improvement to 4% decline). Adverse event rates were greater in the Capsicum extract group (80% compared with 20% in the placebo group, rate ratio 4.12, 95% CI 3.30 to 5.17). The number needed to treat to result in adverse events was 2 (95% CI 1 to 2).Moderate evidence from a single trial of 220 people with knee osteoarthritis suggested that comfrey extract gel probably improves pain without increasing adverse events. At three weeks, the mean pain in the placebo group was 83.5 points on a 100 point scale. Treatment with comfrey reduced pain by a mean of 41.5 points (MD -41.5, 95% CI -48 to -34), an absolute reduction of 42% (34% to 48% reduction). Function was not reported. Adverse events were similar: 6% (7/110) reported adverse events in the comfrey group compared with 14% (15/110) in the placebo group (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.10).Although evidence from a single trial indicated that adhesive patches containing Chinese herbal mixtures FNZG and SJG may improve pain and function, the clinical applicability of these findings are uncertain because participants were only treated and followed up for seven days. We are also uncertain if other topical herbal products (Marhame-Mafasel compress, stinging nettle leaf) improve osteoarthritis symptoms due to the very low quality evidence from single trials.No serious side effects were reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Although the mechanism of action of the topical medicinal plant products provides a rationale basis for their use in the treatment of osteoarthritis, the quality and quantity of current research studies of effectiveness are insufficient. Arnica gel probably improves symptoms as effectively as a gel containing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, but with no better (and possibly worse) adverse event profile. Comfrey extract gel probably improves pain, and Capsicum extract gel probably will not improve pain or function at the doses examined in this review. Further high quality, fully powered studies are required to confirm the trends of effectiveness identifed in studies so far.
在提取和合成化学发明之前,肌肉骨骼疾病是用药用植物制剂治疗的。这些制剂要么口服,要么外用。与口服药用植物产品不同,外用制剂部分起抗刺激剂的作用,口服时有毒性。
通过评估外用药用植物产品有效性的证据,更新2000年Cochrane关于骨关节炎草药疗法的综述。
使用包括所有关节炎形式与药用植物产品组合的术语,检索主流医学和补充医学数据库。我们检索了截至2013年2月的电子数据库(Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、EMBASE、AMED、CINAHL、ISI科学网、世界卫生组织临床试验注册平台),不受语言限制。我们还检索了检索到的试验的参考文献列表。
纳入骨关节炎患者中,外用草药干预与惰性(安慰剂)或活性对照相比的随机对照试验。
两名综述作者独立选择纳入试验,评估纳入研究的偏倚风险并提取数据。
纳入了7项研究(6种不同的药用植物干预措施;785名参与者)。单项研究(5项研究)和不可比研究(2项研究)妨碍了结果的合并。对174名手部骨关节炎患者的单项研究提供的中等质量证据表明,山金车提取物凝胶治疗可能与布洛芬(非甾体抗炎药)治疗产生相似的益处,不良事件数量相似。布洛芬组的平均疼痛在100分制上为44.2分;山金车凝胶治疗3周后疼痛减轻4分:平均差值(MD)-3.8分(95%置信区间(CI)-10.1至2.5),绝对降低4%(从降低10%到增加3%)。布洛芬治疗组的手部功能在30分制上为7.5分;山金车凝胶治疗使功能降低0.4分(MD -0.4,95%CI -1.75至0.95),绝对改善1%(从改善6%到下降3%)。山金车凝胶组的总不良事件发生率更高(13%,而布洛芬组为8%):相对风险(RR)1.65(95%CI 0.72至3.76)。对99名膝骨关节炎患者的单项试验提供的中等质量证据表明,与安慰剂相比,辣椒提取物凝胶可能不会改善疼痛或膝关节功能,且通常与治疗相关的不良事件有关,包括皮肤刺激和烧灼感。在4周随访时,安慰剂组的平均疼痛在100分制上为46分;辣椒提取物治疗使疼痛减轻1分(MD -1,95%CI -6.8至4.8),绝对降低1%(从降低7%到增加5%)。安慰剂组4周时膝关节功能在96分制上为34.8分;辣椒提取物治疗使功能平均改善2.6分(MD -2.6,95%CI -9.5至4.2),绝对改善3%(从改善10%到下降4%)。辣椒提取物组的不良事件发生率更高(80%,而安慰剂组为20%,率比4.12,95%CI 3.30至5.17)。导致不良事件的治疗人数为2(95%CI 1至2)。对220名膝骨关节炎患者的单项试验提供的中等质量证据表明,紫草提取物凝胶可能改善疼痛且不增加不良事件。3周时,安慰剂组的平均疼痛在100分制上为83.5分。紫草治疗使疼痛平均减轻41.5分(MD -41.5,95%CI -48至-34),绝对降低42%(从34%到48%)。未报告功能情况。不良事件相似:紫草组6%(7/110)报告有不良事件,而安慰剂组为14%(15/110)(RR 0.47,95%CI 0.20至1.10)。虽然单项试验的证据表明,含有中草药混合物FNZG和SJG的贴片可能改善疼痛和功能,但这些结果的临床适用性尚不确定,因为参与者仅接受了7天的治疗和随访。由于单项试验的证据质量极低,我们也不确定其他外用草药产品(Marhame-Mafasel敷剂、荨麻叶)是否能改善骨关节炎症状。未报告严重副作用。
虽然外用药用植物产品的作用机制为其用于治疗骨关节炎提供了理论依据,但目前关于有效性的研究质量和数量不足。山金车凝胶可能与含非甾体抗炎药的凝胶一样有效地改善症状,但不良事件情况并不更好(甚至可能更差)。紫草提取物凝胶可能改善疼痛,而在本综述所研究的剂量下,辣椒提取物凝胶可能不会改善疼痛或功能。需要进一步高质量、充分有力的研究来证实目前研究中发现的有效性趋势。