| Literature DB >> 32089718 |
Yihua Fan1, Xinyan Wen2, Qiang Zhang3, Fangyuan Wang1, Qing Li3, Xinju Li1, Yi Guo1.
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at evaluating the effect of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) Bufei granule on stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We retrieved data from PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CNKI, Wanfang, and WeiPu (VIP) for studies focusing on whether the TCM Bufei granule would be effective in treating stable COPD. No language restriction and blinding were used. All trials involved were examined based on the standards of the Cochrane Handbook, and Review Manager 5.3 software was applied for analyzing data. We included four studies involving 599 patients with stable COPD. When compared to placebo treatment, TCM Bufei granule intervention exhibited improvement in the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.70; range, 0.50-0.91; I 2 = 0%), forced vital capacity (FVC) (SMD = 0.43; range, 0.23-0.62; I 2 = 0%), FEV1 percentage of predicted value (FEV1%) (SMD = 0.57; range, 0.38-0.76; I 2 = 4%), and FEV1/FVC (SMD = 0.69; range, 0.50-0.87; I 2 = 0%). There was a statistically significant difference in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire scores between the TCM Bufei granule and placebo treatments (SMD = -1.29; range, -2.32 to -0.26, I 2 = 97%). None of the studies reported any adverse events. Therefore, TCM Bufei granule intervention could help in improving the lung function and quality of life in patients with stable COPD.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32089718 PMCID: PMC7029284 DOI: 10.1155/2020/3439457
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1The flow diagram.
Description of selected studies.
| Study | Sample size | Age | Interventions | Intervention time | Indicators | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Control | Treatment | Control | Treatment | Control | |||
| Sun et al. [ | 69 | 61 | 60.81 ± 8.18 | 60.51 ± 11.03 | Bufei granule | Placebo | 30 days | SGRQ score |
| Guo et al. [ | 136 | 135 | 61.89 ± 5.56 | 60.09 ± 5.09 | Bufei granule | Placebo | 12 weeks | FEV1; FVC; FEV1/predicted value; FEV1/FVC; SGRQ score |
| Yang [ | 34 | 34 | 67.7 | 66.5 ± 7.8 | Bufei granule | Placebo | 12 weeks | FEV1; FVC; FEV1/predicted value; FEV1/FVC; SGRQ score |
| Guo et al. [ | 69 | 61 | NA | NA | Bufei granule | Placebo | 12 weeks | FEV1; FVC; FEV1/predicted value; FEV1/FVC; SGRQ score |
Abbreviations: NA, data not available; SGRQ, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire; FEV1, forced expiratory volume in one second; FVC, forced vital capacity.
Figure 2Risk of bias summary.
Figure 3Meta-analysis of pulmonary function.
Figure 4Meta-analysis of SGRQ score.