| Literature DB >> 29991955 |
Jiju Wang1, Jian Liu1,2, Xiaojia Ni1,2,3, Guangning Nie1,2, Yuyan Zeng1,2, Xiaojing Cao1,2, Xiaoyu Li1,2, Xiaoyun Wang1,2.
Abstract
Objective. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of oral Chinese herbal medicine (OCHM) combined with pharmacotherapy for menopausal depression. Methods. The electronic databases were searched from their inception to December 25, 2016, comprising PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang database, and Chinese Biomedical (CBM) database. Randomized controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of OCHM combined with pharmacotherapy for the people with menopausal depression were eligible. Risk of bias was evaluated according to the Cochrane handbook. Meta-analyses were performed to pool the effect size. Heterogeneity and publication bias were also examined. Results. Twenty-two RCTs with 1770 participants were included in the review. None of the studies used placebo as the control and the risk of bias was high in blinding the participants and personnel. Overall, the meta-analysis demonstrated that adjuvant therapy of OCHM was effective in reducing the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD) scores compared to pharmacotherapy (MD = -3.75; 95% CI = -5.22, -2.29; P < 0.00001). The meta-analysis also suggested that OCHM adjuvant therapy for menopausal depression was superior to pharmacotherapy in terms of response rate of reducing HAMD scores (RR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.10, 1.25; I2 = 55%). Conclusions. OCHM may provide additional effectiveness to pharmacotherapy for the people with menopausal depression. RCTs including the placebo control were required to further determine the additional efficacy of OCHM for menopausal depression.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29991955 PMCID: PMC6016167 DOI: 10.1155/2018/7420394
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Flowchart of study selection.
Basic characteristics of the included studies.
| Reference | Sample size(I/C) | Age(I/C) | Duration of disease(I/C) | Diagnosis standard | Intervention group | Control group | Treatment duration |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chen H, 2012 | 68/51 | 42-59 (50.20 ± 3.94) | 1.76 ± 0.99 y | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 8w | ①②④ |
|
| ||||||||
| Chu YH, 2005 | 30/30 | 41-60 (47.86 ± 4.42) /41-60 (48.3 ± 4.06) | NS | Age; | OCHM + HT | HT | 6w | ①② |
|
| ||||||||
| Guo LH, 2016 | 43/43 | 40-55/42-55 | (1.8 ± 0.6) y/(1.6 ± 0.8) y | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 6w | ② |
|
| ||||||||
| Jiang LX, 2016 | 98/98 | 41-60 (51.18 ± 4.52)/46-54(48.85 ± 3.27) | (4.8 ± 1.7) y/(4.2 ± 1.0) y | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 8w | ①②③④ |
|
| ||||||||
| Li QY, 2009 | 34/34 | 41-56 (46.8 ± 4.1) | NS | Age; | OCHM + pharmacotherapy | pharmacotherapy | 4w | ①②④ |
|
| ||||||||
| Liu F, 2014 | 50/50 | 44-56 (49.3 ± 2.4) | (2.3 ± 0.5) y/(2.1 ± 0.4)y | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 8w | ①② |
|
| ||||||||
| Liu R, 2007 | 30/30 | (54.32 ± 3.29) | (11.32 ± 6.25) m/(12.12 ± 4.58)m | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 8w | ①②④ |
|
| ||||||||
| Ni JP, 2014 | 37/33 | (52 ± 4)/(52 ± 4) | (9 ± 5) m/ | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 4w | ②④ |
|
| ||||||||
| Qu LX, 2010 | 30/30 | 45-55(51.6 ± 3.2) | (10.5±2.7)m | Age; | OCHM + HT + antidepressant | HT + antidepressant | 8w | ①②④ |
|
| ||||||||
| Shi LR, 2016 | 45/45 | 41-58(46.4 ± 4.2) | (11.7 ± 4.5)m | Age; | OCHM + HT + antidepressant | HT + antidepressant | 12w | ①② |
|
| ||||||||
| Sun GC, 2015 | 40/40 | 42.2 ± 2.60 | (1.92 ± 1.06) y /NS | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 4w | ① |
|
| ||||||||
| Sun YH, 2013 | 38/38 | 43-48(44.76 ± 2.24) | (2.38 ± 1.24) y | Age; | OCHM + HT + antidepressant | HT + antidepressant | 4w | ② |
|
| ||||||||
| Wang CG, 2015 | 46/46 | 44-53(46.93 ± 6.8) | NS | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 6w | ①④ |
|
| ||||||||
| Wang SF, 2015 | 40/40 | 43-50(46.45 ± 6.15) | (2.75 ± 0.35)y | Age; | OCHM + HT + antidepressant | HT + antidepressant | 3w | ① |
|
| ||||||||
| Wang XL, 2011 | 60/60 | 45-55(51.21 ± 3.17) | NS | Age; | OCHM + HT + antidepressant | HT + antidepressant | 8w | ① |
|
| ||||||||
| Wang Y, 2015 | 30/30 | 45.20 ± 2.90 | NS | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 8w | ①②③④ |
|
| ||||||||
| Zhang CH, 2013 | 40/40 | 43-56(46.80 ± 4.10) | (11.50±4.30)m | Age; | OCHM + HT + antidepressant | HT + antidepressant | 3w | ①② |
|
| ||||||||
| Zhang CH, 2011 | 30/30 | 45-55(43.50 ± 12.43) | NS | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 6w | ①② |
|
| ||||||||
| Zhang GQ, 2009 | 38/34 | 45-56(51.63 ± 3.68) | (9.44 ± 4.69)m | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 4w | ①②④ |
|
| ||||||||
| Zhang HZ, 2014 | 20/20 | 45-53 | (6-24)m | Age; | OCHM + HT | HT | 12w | ①②③ |
|
| ||||||||
| Zhang SJ, 2012 | 27/27 | 43-54(46.5 ± 6.3) | (3.2 ± 2.8)m | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 4w | ② |
|
| ||||||||
| Zhang XH, 2014 | 27/27 | (47 ± 6.8) | NS | Age; | OCHM + antidepressant | antidepressant | 8w | ①② |
CCMD-3: Criteria for Classification and Diagnosis of Mental Diseases; DSM-IV: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual; ICD-10: International Classification of Disease; m = month; y = year; NS: not stated.OCHM: oral Chinese herbal medicine; HT: hormone therapy; w = week; ①: Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD) score; ②: response rate; ③: Kupperman Menopausal Index (KMI) score; ④: adverse events (AEs).
Chinese herbal medicine of the included studies.
| Study | Formula | a Herbal ingredients | Preparation | Dosage | Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chen H, 2012 | Jie Yu Jing Xin Ke Li | zhenzhumu, huaixiaomai, shoudihuang, shanzhuyu, tusizi, suanzaoren, fuling, chaihu, baishao, meiguihua, danggui, nvzhenzi | granule | 1 bag | bid |
|
| |||||
| Chu YH, 2005 | Xiao Yao Jie Yu Tang | Chaihu, danggui, baishao, baizhu, fuling, weijiang, bohe, zhi gan cao, xian ling pi, nvzhenzi, shengmaiya, chaomaiya | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Guo LH, 2016 | Bai He Di Huang Tang | Baihe, sheng di huang, long gu, muli, danggui, he huan pi, chaihu, ye jiao teng, fushen, yujin, zhi mu | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Jiang LX, 2016 | Wu Ling Jiao Nang | wulingjun | capsule | 3 tablets | tid |
|
| |||||
| Li QY, 2009 | Jie Yu Tang | Dangshen, chuanxiong, danggui, danshen, xiangfu, he huan pi, gualou, yujin | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Liu F, 2014 | Suan Zao Ren Tang | Suanzaoren, chuanxiong, fuling, wuweizi, zhi mu, gan cao | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Liu R, 2007 | Xue Fu Zhu Yu Jiao Nang | Taoren, honghua, chishao, chuanxiong, zhiqiao, chaihu, jiegeng, danggui, dihuang, niuxi, gan cao | capsule | 6 tablets | bid |
|
| |||||
| Ni JP, 2014 | Shen Song Yang Xin Jiao Nang | Renshen, maidong, shanzhuyu, danshen, suanzaoren, sangjishen, chishao, tu bie chong, gansong, huanglian, wuweizi, long gu | capsule | 4 tablets | tid |
|
| |||||
| Qu LX, 2010 | Jie Yu Zi Shen Tang | Chaihu, xiangfu, baishao, baizhu, yujin, gan cao, suanzaoren, fuling, shichangpu, shoudihuang, shanyurou, shanyao | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Shi LR, 2016 | Zi Ni Zi Gan Yang Shen Tang | Fuling, gan cao, baishao, chaihu, chuanxiong | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Sun GC, 2015 | Jia Wei Xiao Yao San | Chaihu, baizhu, bohe, danggui, fuling, baishao, gan cao, shengjiang, zhizi, danpi | granule | 1 bag | tid |
|
| |||||
| Sun YH, 2013 | Zi Ni Shu Gan Jie Yu Tang | Chaihu, xiangfu, chuanxiong, chishao, yujin, chenpi, sheng di huang, shanzhuyu, danpi, yuanzhi, gan cao | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Wang CG, 2015 | Zi Ni An Shen Jie Yu Tang | Huangqi, huangqin, chaihu, muxiang, zhiqiao, gan cao, sharen, peilan, dangshen, fushen, danggui, baizhu, chuanxiong, yujin, suanzaoren, ye jiao teng, long yan rou | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Wang SF, 2015 | Zi Ni Shu Gan Jie Yu Tang | Chaihu, xiangfu, chuanxiong, baishao, yujin, chenpi, zhi mu, shengdi, shanzhuyu, danpi, suanzaoren, gan cao | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Wang XL, 2011 | Si Hua Jie Yu Tang | He huan hua, xuanhua, meiguihua, baimeihua, suanzaoren, bai zi ren, fuxiaomai, fushen, ye jiao teng, tiandong, maidong, wuweizi, gan cao, dazao | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Wang Y, 2015 | Zi Ni Bai He Di Huang Tang | Baihe, shengdi, maidong, wuweizi, he huan pi, ye jiao teng, fuling, yuanzhi, shichangpu, yujin, chuanxiong, gan cao | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Zhang CH, 2013 | Wu Ling Jiao Nang | wulingjun | capsule | 3 tablets | tid |
|
| |||||
| Zhang CH, 2011 | Zi Ni Zi Yin Bu Shen Tang | Chaihu, xiangfu, chuanxiong, baishao, yujin, shoudihuang, fuling, shanzhuyu, suanzaoren, gan cao | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Zhang GQ, 2009 | Zi Ni Zao Ren Bu Xue | Suanzaoren, fuling, chuanxiong, zhi mu, gan cao, huangqi, danggui, shanzhuyu, shoudihuang, danshen, chaihu, xiangfu, yujin, shichangpu | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Zhang HZ, 2014 | Si Er Wu He Fang And Gan Mai Da Zao Tang | Danggui, baishao, danshen, shoudihuang, xianmao, xian ling pi, fu pen zi, tusizi, wuweizi, che qian zi, gouqi, yujin, huanglian, rougui, xiaomai, gan cao, dazao | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Zhang SJ, 2012 | Zi Ni Bai He Di Huang Tang | Baihe, shengdi, danshen, chuanxiong, juhua | decoction | 1 pack decocted twice | bid |
|
| |||||
| Zhang XH, 2014 | Kun Tai Jiao Nang | Shoudihuang, huanglian, baishao, huangqin, ejiao, fuling | capsule | 4 tablets | tid |
a The herbal ingredients are presented as Chinese pinyin. Bid: twice per day; tid: three times per day.
Figure 2Risk of bias across included studies.
Figure 3Risk of bias of individual studies. +: low risk of bias; ?: unclear risk of bias; −: high risk of bias.
Figure 4Forest plot of HAMD scores. HAMD: Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; CHM: Chinese herbal medicine; HT: hormone therapy.
Figure 5Forest plot of response rate.
Figure 6Forest plot of Kupperman menopausal index scores.
Figure 7Forest plot of adverse event.
Figure 8Funnel plot of HAMD scores.
Figure 9Funnel plot of response rate.