Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100010, China.
J Tradit Chin Med. 2020 Dec;40(6):897-907. doi: 10.19852/j.cnki.jtcm.2020.06.001.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of a Shenlingbaizhu (SLBZ) formula in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The effectiveness of SLBZ with or without conventional treatment was compared to that of conventional treatment alone. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of four Chinese electronic databases, three English language databases, and two English language trial registries from inception to June 2019 was performed. Two authors independently screened the citations and retrieved full publications of randomized trials on the use of SLBZ with or without conventional treatment for IBS. The methodological quality of the trials was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias. Data were extracted and subjected to Meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of the SLBZ formula with or without conventional treatment to conventional treatment alone. RESULTS: Thirteen trials (comprising a total of 868 patients with IBS) were included in this review. The risk of bias of all 13 included trials was assessed as moderate. The SLBZ formula was associated with significant improvements in cure rate [relative risk (RR) score of 2.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.43 to 3.95, I 2 = 0%; 8 trials, n = 487, fixed-effects model (FEM)], diarrhea severity score [mean difference (MD) score of -0.62, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.20, I 2 = 88%; 4 trials, n = 286, random effects model (REM)], abdominal pain severity score (MD score of -0.61, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.52, I 2 = 63%; 4 trials, n = 286, FEM), and abdominal distention severity score (MD score of -0.88, 95% CI -1.54 to -0.21, I 2 = 91%; 3 trials, n = 226, REM) compared to the conventional treatment alone. Adverse events were reported in five trials but only one of these indicated any adverse events associated with SLBZ. CONCLUSION: Based on the 13 trials reviewed here, the SLBZ formula with or without conventional treatment appeared to be safe and more effective in improving the cure rate and reducing the severity of diarrhea, abdominal pain, and abdominal distention compared to conventional treatment alone. However, these trials only generated a moderate quality of evidence, and well-designed and high-quality random controlled trials of the SLBZ formula for the treatment of IBS are required to confirm the efficacy of this treatment option.
目的:评估参苓白术散(SLBZ)配方治疗肠易激综合征(IBS)的有效性和安全性。将 SLBZ 联合常规治疗与单独常规治疗进行比较。
方法:对四个中文电子数据库、三个英文数据库和两个英文临床试验注册库进行了全面的文献检索,检索时间从建库至 2019 年 6 月。两位作者独立筛选引用文献并检索了关于 SLBZ 联合或不联合常规治疗用于 IBS 的随机试验的全文。使用 Cochrane 协作组评估偏倚风险的工具对试验的方法学质量进行了评估。提取数据并进行 Meta 分析,以比较 SLBZ 配方联合或不联合常规治疗与单独常规治疗的疗效。
结果:本综述共纳入了 13 项试验(共 868 例 IBS 患者)。所有 13 项纳入试验的偏倚风险均被评估为中度。与单独常规治疗相比,SLBZ 配方可显著提高治愈率[相对风险(RR)评分 2.38,95%置信区间(CI)1.43 至 3.95,I 2 = 0%;8 项试验,n = 487,固定效应模型(FEM)]、腹泻严重程度评分[平均差值(MD)评分-0.62,95%CI-1.05 至-0.20,I 2 = 88%;4 项试验,n = 286,随机效应模型(REM)]、腹痛严重程度评分(MD 评分-0.61,95%CI-0.70 至-0.52,I 2 = 63%;4 项试验,n = 286,FEM)和腹胀严重程度评分(MD 评分-0.88,95%CI-1.54 至-0.21,I 2 = 91%;3 项试验,n = 226,REM)。与单独常规治疗相比,不良反应仅在 5 项试验中报告,但其中只有 1 项报告了与 SLBZ 相关的不良反应。
结论:基于本文综述的 13 项试验,SLBZ 配方联合或不联合常规治疗似乎安全,且在提高治愈率和减轻腹泻、腹痛和腹胀严重程度方面优于单独常规治疗。然而,这些试验仅产生了中等质量的证据,需要设计良好且高质量的 SLBZ 配方治疗 IBS 的随机对照试验来证实这种治疗选择的疗效。
J Tradit Chin Med. 2020-12
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005-4-18
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006-1-25
J Altern Complement Med. 2006-5
Evid Based Child Health. 2013-1
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006-10-18
World J Gastroenterol. 2022-9-7
Front Pharmacol. 2022-5-18