| Literature DB >> 29770157 |
Li Ren1, Jie Wang1, Ling Feng1, Shuli Wang1, Jun Li1.
Abstract
Suxiao jiuxin pill is considered an effective ancillary drug in patients with coronary heart disease. Although numerous small, single-center clinical trials have been conducted, the benefits and harms of suxiao jiuxin pill remain controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to clarify the efficacy of suxiao jiuxin pill on patients with coronary heart disease. Randomized controlled trials were identified by using the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Wanfang, Weipu, and China Knowledge Resource Integrated databases (until June 2016). Pooled relative risks (RR), weighted mean differences (WMD), and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were estimated using random-effects models. Forty-one trials involving 6276 patients were included in our analysis. Administration of suxiao jiuxin pill significantly improved electrocardiogram (ECG) results when compared with other therapies (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.38, and P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed that suxiao jiuxin pills improve ECG results more than salvia tablets (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.41 to 1.67, and P < 0.001), isosorbide dinitrate (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.44, and P = 0.001), nitroglycerin (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.56, and P < 0.001), and other drugs (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.44, and P < 0.001). Available evidence additionally suggests that suxiao jiuxin pills could significantly reduce total cholesterol (WMD -0.62 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.06 to -0.18 mmol/L, and P = 0.005) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels (WMD -1.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.42 to -0.82 mmol/L, and P < 0.001) and increase high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels (WMD 0.32 mmol/L, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.58 mmol/L, and P = 0.014). However, no significant differences were observed in total triglyceride levels, plasma viscosity, hematocrit, and fibrinogen. No incidences of adverse reactions were observed after administration of suxiao jiuxin pill. Improvements in ECG results and lipid profiles were also observed after suxiao jiuxin administration compared to other therapies. It also decreased low-cut and high-cut whole blood viscosity without significant adverse reactions.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29770157 PMCID: PMC5892298 DOI: 10.1155/2018/9745804
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Process used to select relevant studies for inclusion in the meta-analysis.
Characteristics of selected clinical trials included in the meta-analysis.
| Author name | Year | Sample size | Study design | Age | Age | Country | Comparators | Dosage/frequency/cycle | Outcomes | Follow-up period | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (treatment) | (control) | Suxiao jiuxin pills | Comparators | ||||||||
| He | 1995 | 48 | RCT | 42–60 | 40–57 | China | Salvia | 4# tid | 3# tid | Hemorheology | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Song | 1995 | 149 | RCT | 55 ± 7.2 | 56 ± 6.9 | China | Salvia | 5# tid | 3# tid | ECG, blood pressure, and heart rate | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Wang | 1996 | 60 | RCT | NR | NR | China | Shexiang Baoxin pills | 5# tid | 3# tid | ECG and symptom | 2 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Ke | 1996 | 72 | RCT | 45–79 | 46–78 | China | Nitroglycerin | 6# tid | 0.5 mg Q8 h | ECG and symptom | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Gao et al. | 1996 | 147 | RCT | 36–85 | 35–84 | China | Nitroglycerin | 10# | 0.5 mg | ECG and symptom | Immediately |
|
| |||||||||||
| Yun | 1996 | 318 | RCT | 44–76 | 44–75 | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 6–10# | 10# tid | ECG and symptom | 2 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Li | 1998 | 154 | RCT | 58.93 ± 10.91 | 59.25 ± 10.12 | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 0.2 g tid | 10# tid | ECG and symptom | 8 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Feng and Zhou | 2000 | 500 | RCT | 56 ± 4.24 | 55 ± 4.36 | China | Salvia | 10# tid | 10# tid | ECG and symptom, Lipid profile and hemorheology | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Mei | 2000 | 128 | RCT | NR | NR | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 6# tid | 10# tid | ECG, symptom, and hemorheology | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Xiao | 2000 | 138 | RCT | NR | NR | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 5# tid | 10# tid | ECG and symptom | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Ru | 2000 | 90 | RCT | 45–70 | NR | China | Salvia | 5# tid | 3# tid | ECG, symptom, lipid profile, and hemorheology | Unclear |
|
| |||||||||||
| Shu | 2000 | 80 | RCT | 58.3 ± 7.24 | 57.2 ± 8.27 | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 10# tid | 10# tid | ECG and symptom | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Yong | 2000 | 148 | RCT | 45–72 | 47–70 | China | Nitroglycerin | 10# | 5 mg | ECG, Symptom, blood pressure, and heart rate | Immediately |
|
| |||||||||||
| Guang | 2000 | 248 | RCT | NR | NR | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 5# tid | 10# tid | Blood pressure, heart rate, and lipid profile | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Li | 2000 | 166 | RCT | NR | NR | China | Nitroglycerin | 5# tid | 0.5 mg | ECG and symptom | 2 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Yu | 2000 | 184 | RCT | 40–82 | NR | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 5# tid | 10# tid | ECG and symptom | 15 days |
|
| |||||||||||
| Ya | 2000 | 60 | RCT | 60–84 | 61–84 | China | Nitroglycerin | 5# tid | 10# tid | ECG and symptom | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Yuan | 2000 | 102 | RCT | 61.68 ± 4.71 | 59.53 ± 5.62 | China | Huoxin pills | 5# tid | 1# tid | ECG, symptom, and lipid profile | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Duan and Yang | 2002 | 80 | RCT | 42–79 | 41–75 | China | Xinkeshu capsule | 5# tid | 4# tid | ECG, UCG, lipid profile, and hemorheology | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Hai | 2002 | 70 | RCT | 57 ± 7 | 59 ± 6 | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 5# tid | 10# tid | Symptom and hemorheology | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Bu | 2002 | 100 | RCT | 32–72 | NR | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 4–6# tid | 10–20# tid | ECG and symptom | Unclear |
|
| |||||||||||
| Pei | 2003 | 102 | RCT | 56.1 | 55.2 | China | Nitroglycerin | 5# tid | Unclear | ECG, lipid profile, and hemorheology | 8 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Jin | 2003 | 178 | RCT | NR | NR | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 5# tid | 20 mg qd | ECG, Symptom, lipid profile, and hemorheology | 6 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Ma | 2004 | 116 | RCT | 63.4 ± 6.74 | 62.9 ± 7.84 | China | Salvia | 10# tid | 3# tid | ECG, symptom, and hemorheology | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Pei | 2004 | 100 | RCT | 57.5 ± 10.2 | 63.1 ± 7.9 | China | Xinkeshu capsule | 6# tid | 4# tid | ECG and symptom | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Yue | 2004 | 78 | RCT | 52–75 | 55–74 | China | Placebo | 5# tid | 10# tid | ECG, UCG, and symptom | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Hu | 2004 | 80 | RCT | 51.56 ± 11.69 | 50.89 ± 11.02 | China | Nitroglycerin | 10# tid | 0.5 mg tid | ECG and symptom | 24 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Zhu | 2005 | 199 | RCT | 61.8 | 59.5 | China | Glucose-insulin-potassium therapy | 4–6# tid | Q2 d | ECG, symptom, and lipid profile | 15 days |
|
| |||||||||||
| Wan | 2005 | 64 | RCT | NR | NR | China | Hesu pills | 5# tid | 1# tid | ECG and symptom | 2 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Shui | 2006 | 73 | RCT | 43–78 | 45–76 | China | Salvia | 10# tid | 10# tid | ECG and lipid profile | 8 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Cao and Zhang | 2007 | 187 | RCT | 57.15 ± 5.38 | 58.77 ± 5.01 | China | Salvia | 6# tid | 6# tid | ECG and symptom | 2 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Run | 2007 | 90 | RCT | NR | NR | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 10–15# | 10 mg | ECG and symptom | Immediately |
|
| |||||||||||
| Wang | 2008 | 60 | RCT | 63.9 ± 12.1 | 64.1 ± 11.2 | China | Shexiang Baoxin pills | 5# tid | 1# tid | ECG and symptom | 2 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| L. Wen | 2009 | 88 | RCT | 56.7 | 56.8 | China | Isosorbide dinitrate | 5# tid | 10# tid | ECG and symptom | 8 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Feng | 2009 | 900 | RCT | NR | NR | China | Salvia | 6# tid | 3# tid | ECG and symptom | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| S. L. Wen | 2009 | 50 | RCT | NR | NR | China | Tongxinluo pills | 5# tid | 4# tid | ECG and symptom | 2 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Guo | 2012 | 60 | RCT | 42–70 | 43–73 | China | Salvia | 5# tid | 3# tid | UCG and hemorheology | 2 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Qiao | 2012 | 300 | RCT | 39–82 | 40–81 | China | Salvia | 5# tid | 3# tid | ECG and symptom | 4 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Xin | 2013 | 289 | RCT | 58.86 ± 10.57 | 57.69 ± 9.93 | China | Standard therapy | 10# tid | Blank | ECG and symptom | 2 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Long | 2013 | 120 | RCT | 43–68 | 42–67 | China | Standard therapy | 10# tid | Blank | ECG and symptom | 2 weeks |
|
| |||||||||||
| Li | 2015 | 100 | RCT | 44–75 | 45–76 | China | Salvia | 6# tid | 3# tid | ECG and symptom | 4 weeks |
NR: not reported; RCT: randomized controlled trial; tid: three times a day; Q4–6 h: every 4–6 h; Q8 h: every 8 h; ECG: electrocardiograph; UCG: ultrasound cardiogram; #: tablet.
Jadad quality scores of selected studies.
| Author name | Randomization | Generating randomized sequences | Blinding | Withdrawals and dropouts | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guan-hua He | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Zhi-jin Song | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Dong-ping Wang | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Ke-fu Ji | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Yu-chu Gao | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Yun-yuan Guo | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Li An | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Ling Feng | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Mei Hu | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Xiao-chun Liu | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Ru-bao Jia | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Shu-dong Yang | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Yong-jin Hou | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Guang-yu Tang | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Li-jun Zhou | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Yu-ping Li | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Ya-xiong Zhan | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Jing-xian Yuan | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Ke-jie Duan | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Hai Shi | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Bu-ce Sun | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Pei-ying Wu | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Jin Gao | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Xian-zhen Ma | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Pei-fen Chang | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Yue-sheng Zhao | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gang Hu | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Dong-you Zhu | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Wei Wan | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Shui-xiang Wan | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Sheng-hai Cao | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Run-lian Tang | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Fei Wang | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Wen Luo | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Feng-hua Song | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Wen-sheng Li | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Wei-qin Guo | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Qiao-kun Xu | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Xin He | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Long-jiang Qian | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Li Xiao-jin | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
Figure 2Relative risks for ECG improvement in the treatment and control groups.
Metaregression based on sample size and mean age.
| Outcomes | Sample size | Mean age |
|---|---|---|
| Electrocardiogram improvement | 0.206 | 0.059 |
| Total cholesterol | 0.758 | 0.236 |
| Total triglycerides | 0.013 | 0.507 |
| Total low-density lipoprotein | 0.283 | 0.513 |
| Total high-density lipoprotein | 0.715 | 0.789 |
| Low-cutting whole blood Viscosity | 0.917 | 0.774 |
| High-cutting whole blood Viscosity | 0.412 | 0.621 |
| Plasma viscosity | 0.075 | 0.842 |
| Hematocrit | 0.049 | 0.490 |
| Fibrinogen | 0.890 | 0.345 |
| Adverse reactions | 0.554 | 0.772 |
Figure 3Relative risks for ECG improvement in the various subgroups.
Figure 4Funnel plot of studies included in the meta-analysis.