Search

Objective: To present the evidence of the therapeutic effects and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) used with or without conventional western therapy for COVID-19. Methods: Clinical studies on the therapeutic effects and safety of CHM for COVID-19 were included. We summarized the general characteristics of included studies, evaluated methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, analyzed the use of CHM, used Revman 5.4 software to present the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) to estimate the therapeutic effects and safety of CHM. Results: A total of 58 clinical studies were identified including RCTs (17.24%, 10), non-randomized controlled trials (1.72%, 1), retrospective studies with a control group (18.97%, 11), case-series (20.69%, 12) and case-reports (41.38%, 24). No RCTs of high methodological quality were identified. The most frequently tested oral Chinese patent medicine, Chinese herbal medicine injection or prescribed herbal decoction were: Lianhua Qingwen granule/capsule, Xuebijing injection and Maxing Shigan Tang. In terms of aggravation rate, pooled analyses showed that there were statistical differences between the intervention group and the comparator group (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.82, six RCTs; RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.64, five retrospective studies with a control group), that is, CHM plus conventional western therapy appeared better than conventional western therapy alone in reducing aggravation rate. In addition, compared with conventional western therapy, CHM plus conventional western therapy had potential advantages in increasing the recovery rate and shortening the duration of fever, cough and fatigue, improving the negative conversion rate of nucleic acid test, and increasing the improvement rate of chest CT manifestations and shortening the time from receiving the treatment to the beginning of chest CT manifestations improvement. For adverse events, pooled data showed that there were no statistical differences between the CHM and the control groups. Conclusion: Current low certainty evidence suggests that there maybe a tendency that CHM plus conventional western therapy is superior to conventional western therapy alone. The use of CHM did not increase the risk of adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The effectiveness and safety of using Brucea javanica oil (BJO) in combination with Transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE) for liver cancer treatment are subjects of debate. This study aims to assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of BJO-assisted TACE versus TACE alone and quantifies the differences between these two treatment methods. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in multiple databases including PubMed, Cochrane, CNKI, and Wanfang, until 1 July 2023. Meta-analysis was conducted, and the results were presented as mean difference (MD), risk ratio (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: The search yielded 11 RCTs, with a combined sample size of 1054 patients. Meta-analysis revealed that BJO-assisted TACE exhibited superior outcomes compared to standalone TACE. Specific data revealed that BJO-assisted TACE improves clinical benefit rate by 22% [RR = 1.22, 95% CI (1.15, 1.30)], increases the number of people with improved quality of life by 32%, resulting in an average score improvement of 9.53 points [RR = 1.32, 95% CI (1.22, 1.43); MD = 9.53, 95% CI (6.95, 12.10)]. Furthermore, AFP improvement rate improved significantly by approximately 134% [RR = 2.34, 95% CI (1.58, 3.46)], accompanied by notable improvements in liver function indicators, with an average reduction of 27.19 U/L in AST [MD = -27.19, 95% CI (-40.36, -14.02)], 20.77 U/L in ALT [MD = -20.77, 95% CI (-39.46, -2.08)], 12.17 μmol/L in TBIL [MD = -12.17, 95% CI (-19.38, -4.97)], and a decrease of 43.72 pg/mL in VEGF [MD = -43.72, 95% CI (-63.29, -24.15)]. Most importantly, there was a 29% reduction in the occurrence of adverse reactions [RR = 0.71, 95% CI (0.60, 0.84)]. Conclusion: These findings indicate that BJO-assisted TACE may be considered as a potentially beneficial treatment option for liver cancer patients when compared to standalone TACE. It appears to contribute to improved treatment outcomes, enhanced quality of life, and potentially reduced adverse reactions, suggesting it warrants further investigation as a promising approach for liver cancer treatment. Systematic Review Registration: identifier CRD42023428948., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wu, Zhang, Li, Diao, Huang, Gao, Liang and Luo.)