Zeng Qiaoqiao, Li Jingnan, Wu Qin, Li Xiaojie, Yan Huixin, Bi Yunpeng, Gao Yixin, Zhuo Yue
Acupuncture and Massage College of Changchun University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changchun, China.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Dec 20;103(51):e40491. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000040491.
More and more studies have shown that Chinese medicine can effectively and safely treat allergic rhinitis (AR) in children. This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety differences between conventional therapy and the Chinese herbal medicine Cang-Er-Zi-San (CEZS) from an evidence-based perspective, and guide the clinical treatment of pediatric AR.
This study aims to compare the effects of intervention with traditional Chinese medicine formula CEZS on the clinical symptoms of pediatric AR, determine the effectiveness and safety of CEZS in treating pediatric AR, and obtain high-quality clinical evidence. Research method: based on the preferred reporting item (PRISMA) statement of systematic review and meta-analysis, inclusion and exclusion criteria were established. Retrieve 7 mainstream medical databases to obtain randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional Chinese medicine CEZS for the treatment of pediatric AR. Include RCTs that meet research requirements. Then extract the data information and evaluate the quality using the Cochrane bias risk assessment tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan software on the effective rate, clinical symptom relief time, recurrence rate, and adverse event indicators. Calculate relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI), test heterogeneity identify its source, evaluate publication bias through funnel plots.
15 RCTs and 1361 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the efficacy of Chinese herbal compound CEZS in the treatment of children with AR was significantly superior to other therapies. Effective rate (RR = 1.21; 95% CI = 1.15, 1.26) The difference was statistically significant, and the symptom relief time, Recurrence rate, adverse event, the time of symptom relief in the treatment group were all better than those in the control group. It is suggested that CEZS therapy is more suitable for the clinical treatment of children with AR.
CEZS has a definite therapeutic effect on children with AR and is an effective method for treating it. However, due to biased results and limited research, a large number of high-quality studies are needed to validate the effectiveness of CEZS and provide new treatments for clinical reference.
越来越多的研究表明，中药能有效且安全地治疗儿童过敏性鼻炎（AR）。本荟萃分析旨在从循证角度比较传统疗法与中药苍耳子散（CEZS）之间的疗效及安全性差异，以指导儿童AR的临床治疗。
本研究旨在比较中药方剂CEZS干预对儿童AR临床症状的影响，确定CEZS治疗儿童AR的有效性和安全性，获取高质量临床证据。研究方法：基于系统评价与荟萃分析的首选报告项目（PRISMA）声明制定纳入与排除标准。检索7个主流医学数据库，获取中药CEZS治疗儿童AR的随机对照试验（RCT）。纳入符合研究要求的RCT。随后提取数据信息，使用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具进行质量评估。运用RevMan软件对有效率、临床症状缓解时间、复发率及不良事件指标进行荟萃分析。计算相对危险度（RR）及95%置信区间（95%CI），检验异质性并确定其来源，通过漏斗图评估发表偏倚。
纳入15项RCT及1361例患者。荟萃分析结果显示，中药复方CEZS治疗儿童AR的疗效显著优于其他疗法。有效率（RR = 1.21；95%CI = 1.15，1.26）差异有统计学意义，且治疗组的症状缓解时间、复发率、不良事件方面均优于对照组。提示CEZS疗法更适合儿童AR的临床治疗。
CEZS对儿童AR有确切治疗效果，是治疗该病的有效方法。然而，由于结果存在偏倚且研究有限，需要大量高质量研究来验证CEZS的有效性，为临床提供新的治疗参考。
