A systematic review and meta-analysis of Danshen combined with mesalazine for the treatment of ulcerative colitis.

Purpose: Current pharmacological treatments for Ulcerative Colitis (UC) have limitations. Therefore, it is important to elucidate any available alternative or complementary treatment, and Chinese herbal medicine shows the potential for such treatment. As a traditional Chinese herbal medicine, Danshenrelated preparations have been reported to be beneficial for UC by improving coagulation function and inhibiting inflammatory responses. In spite of this, the credibility and safety of this practice are incomplete. Therefore, in order to investigate whether Danshen preparation (DSP) is effective and safe in the treatment of UC, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database and CQVIP Database were searched for this review. The main observation indexes were the effect of DSP combined with mesalazine or DSP on the effective rate, platelet count (PLT), mean platelet volume (MPV) and C-reactive protein (CRP) of UC. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The selected studies were evaluated for quality and data processing using RevMan5.4 and Stata17.0 software. Results: A total of 37 studies were included. Among them, 26 clinical trials with 2426 patients were included and 11 animal experimental studies involving 208 animals were included. Meta-analysis results showed that compared with mesalazine alone, combined use of DSP can clearly improve the clinical effective rate (RR 0.86%, 95% CI:0.83-0.88, p < 0.00001) of UC. Furthermore it improved blood coagulation function by decreasing serum PLT and increasing MPV levels, and controlled inflammatory responses by reducing serum CRP, TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-8 levels in patients. Conclusion: Combining DSP with mesalazine for UC can enhance clinical efficacy. However, caution should be exercised in interpreting the results of this review due to its flaws, such as allocation concealment and uncertainty resulting from the blinding of the study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]