OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Qingrelishi-category Chinese medicine (for dispelling heat and resolving dampness) in the treatment of chronic prostatitis. METHODS: Randomized clinical trials or controlled clinical trials comparing Qingrelishi with plant america, other herbal medicine and Western medicine in the treatment of chronic prostatitis were identified by electronic and manual retrieval and analysis. The methodological quality of the included trials was assessed and Meta-analysis was performed with Revman 4. 2 software. RESULTS: Forty-four randomized clinical trials or controlled clinical trials (n=5746) were identified. The methodological quality ranked high in three double-blind trials and the others ranked low. Meta-analysis indicated that Qingrelishi was more effective than Nankangpian( RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.10-1.35) and Prostate( RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.13-1.41) in the treatment of chronic prostatitis. Subgroup analysis revealed that Qingrelishi was more effective than Qianliekang (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.19-1.45) and quinolones antibiotic (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.15-1.57). There were no significant differences in efficacy either between Qingrelishi and a-receptor blocker and Puleanpian or between Qingrelishi plus quinolone antibiotics and quinolone antibiotics alone. Eighteen articles reported side effects and no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Qingrelishi may be effective in the treatment of chronic prostatitis. However, the evidence is not strong due to the generally low methodological quality and the variations of the herbs. More randomized clinical trials are required.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Qingrelishi-category Chinese medicine (for dispelling heat and resolving dampness) in the treatment of chronic prostatitis. METHODS: Randomized clinical trials or controlled clinical trials comparing Qingrelishi with plant america, other herbal medicine and Western medicine in the treatment of chronic prostatitis were identified by electronic and manual retrieval and analysis. The methodological quality of the included trials was assessed and Meta-analysis was performed with Revman 4. 2 software. RESULTS: Forty-four randomized clinical trials or controlled clinical trials (n=5746) were identified. The methodological quality ranked high in three double-blind trials and the others ranked low. Meta-analysis indicated that Qingrelishi was more effective than Nankangpian( RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.10-1.35) and Prostate( RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.13-1.41) in the treatment of chronic prostatitis. Subgroup analysis revealed that Qingrelishi was more effective than Qianliekang (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.19-1.45) and quinolones antibiotic (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.15-1.57). There were no significant differences in efficacy either between Qingrelishi and a-receptor blocker and Puleanpian or between Qingrelishi plus quinolone antibiotics and quinolone antibiotics alone. Eighteen articles reported side effects and no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Qingrelishi may be effective in the treatment of chronic prostatitis. However, the evidence is not strong due to the generally low methodological quality and the variations of the herbs. More randomized clinical trials are required.