| Literature DB >> 34093720 |
Yan-Li Guo1, Feng Gao1, Tai-Wei Dong1, Yang Bai2, Qiao Liu1, Ruo-Lan Li1, Shu-Ting Yan1, Mei Chen3, Pei-Feng Wei1,2, Miao-Miao Xi2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Tripterygium wilfordii polyglycosides tablet (TGt) is an oral preparation extracted from plant Tripterygium wilfordii. It has the effects of anti-inflammation and inhibition of cellular and humoral immunity. However, many reports of adverse reactions caused by TGt have limited its application. In this paper, the clinical efficacy and safety of TGt in the treatment of chronic kidney disease (CKD) were verified by data mining and analysis, so as to provide theoretical data support for the application and development of TGt.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34093720 PMCID: PMC8140836 DOI: 10.1155/2021/6640594
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Results of literature screening.
Basic information and quality evaluation results included in the literature.
| Author | Year | Disease | Included in the study | Follow-up time (mo) | Course of disease (y) | Intervention measures | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| M/F | Age (y) |
|
| |||||
| Tan Wei [ | 2014 | NS | 15/15 | 20/10 | 28.5 ± 3.5 | 6–12 | 1.13 | TG | Glucocorticoid |
| Li Peng [ | 2018 | NS | 30/30 | 33/27 | 48.62 ± 1.41/48.63 ± 11.25 | 6 | 1.52 ± 1.41/1.65 ± 1.47 | TG | Prednisone |
| Luo Minghua [ | 2018 | NS | 48/48 | 56/40 | 51.6 ± 10.3/51.2 ± 10.1 | 6 | 5.1 ± 1.9/4.9 ± 1.7 | TG | Prednisone |
| Shi Qingwan [ | 2018 | NS | 50/50 | — | 49 ± 6.9/47 ± 5.7 | 6 | 19 ± 6.7/18 ± 5.7 | TG | Prednisone acetate |
| Guo Peng [ | 2016 | NS | 40/40 | 43/37 | 45.7 ± 2.1/45.5 ± 3 | 3 | 8.2 ± 1/7.5 ± 1.2 | TG | CTX |
| Song Bo [ | 2018 | NS | 36/35 | 38/33 | 50.26 ± 9.27/48.68 ± 9.38 | 6 | 14.53 ± 6.35/13.28 ± 6.13 | TG | Prednisone |
| Ye Lan [ | 2015 | NS | 30/30 | 42/18 | 33.9 ± 3.8 | 18–24 | — | TG | Methylprednisolone + dipyridamole |
| Chang Xuejing [ | 2013 | NS | 41/41 | 66/22 | 34.9 ± 3.9 | 18–24 | — | TG | Methylprednisolone + dipyridamole |
| Deng Shuntian [ | 2017 | NS | 36/36 | 43/29 | 48.2 ± 2.5/47.6 ± 2.4 | 8 | 3.9 ± 1.9/3.8 ± 1.2 | TG | Prednisone acetate + CTX |
| Jiang Xiaoli [ | 2014 | NS | 31/31 | 38/24 | 66.7 ± 4.2/64.3 ± 4.5 | 6 | 8 ± 4.1/8.7 ± 4.5 | TG | Methylprednisolone |
| Jiang Chunxia [ | 2016 | NS | 24/24 | 27/21 | 56.07 ± 6.97/54.27 ± 6.26 | — | — | TG | Methylprednisolone |
| LiaoWen [ | 2016 | NS | 56/56 | 57/55 | 70.2 ± 5.6/70.5 ± 5.4 | 6 | 0.8 ± 0.38/0.79 ± 0.4 | TG | Methylprednisolone |
| Wan Danguo [ | 2020 | NS | 60/60 | 36/24 | 69.43 ± 3.74 | 6 | 3.52 ± 0.94 | TG | Methylprednisolone |
| Zhang Liyang [ | 2019 | NS | 44/44 | 47/41 | 41.11 ± 7.24/41.05 ± 7.05 | 12 | 3.18 ± 1.08/3.25 ± 1.02 | TG | Methylqiangdisong |
| Deng Minghua [ | 2014 | NS | 23/23 | 21/25 | 31.6 ± 6.9/35.2 ± 8.7 | 2 | — | TG | Sufficient prednisone |
| Zhou Zhaoxie [ | 2018 | NS | 45/45 | 50/40 | 52.5 ± 6.5/52.3 ± 6.3 | 12 | 3.2 ± 1.1/3.2 ± 1 | TG | Prednisone |
| Niu Hejun [ | 2015 | NS | 20/20 | 24/16 | 62.71 ± 9.13 | 12 | 0.25–10 | TG | Prednisone |
| Zhang Peiguang [ | 2019 | NS | 25/25 | 28/22 | 39.87 ± 5.21/39.94 ± 5.23 | 6 | 1.57 ± 0.22 | TG | Basics + prednisone acetate |
| Yan Lingzhi [ | 2014 | NS | 30/30 | 38/22 | 45.2 ± 18.3/43.8 ± 14.3 | 3 | 10.8 ± 3.5/6.9 ± 3.1 | TG | CTX |
| Chen Fang [ | 2012 | NS | 50/50 | 46/54 | 23–66 | 3–6 | 0.5–12 | TG | CTX |
| Liu Qian [ | 2017 | NS | 41/41 | 53/29 | 39.5 ± 8.6/38.9 ± 8.5 | 6 | 2.9 ± 1.1/2.8 ± 1.3 | TG | Prednisone |
| Gao Xiaofeng [ | 2019 | NS | 42/42 | 34/50 | 36.74 ± 6.28/37.18 ± 6.94 | 6 | 0.94 ± 0.39/1.01 ± 0.44 | TG | Basics + MMF |
| Ni Ying [ | 2017 | NS | 60/60 | 51/69 | 40.2 ± 8.3/38.5 ± 7.3 | 6 | 1.12 ± 0.71/1.05 ± 0.68 | TG | MMF |
| Zhao Jingyu [ | 2018 | NS | 36/36 | 39/33 | 37.77 ± 5.42/37.68 ± 5.35 | 6 | 1.61 ± 0.27/1.58 ± 0.24 | TG | Basic + prednisone acetate |
| Wu Wensheng [ | 2019 | NS | 42/42 | 41/43 | 51.06 ± 4.18/50.28 ± 4.12 | 6 | 1.64 ± 0.86/1.56 ± 0.85 | TG | Regular + prednisone |
| Xiong Xinrong [ | 2019 | NS | 40/40 | 45/35 | 64.1 ± 3.5/63.2 ± 4.2 | 3–6 | 5.1 ± 1.5/5.2 ± 1.3 | TG | Prednisone |
| Liu Fan [ | 2017 | NS | 64/64 | 73/55 | 52.39 ± 12.37/51.82 ± 13.86 | 6 | 1.62 ± 0.68/1.55 ± 0.69 | TG | Prednisone |
| Zhang Zhifang [ | 2015 | NS | 40/40 | 49/31 | 51.02 ± 9.27/49.16 ± 7.28 | 6 | 1.25 ± 1.24/1.34 ± 1.29 | TG | Prednisone |
| Lai Lijun [ | 2019 | NS | 29/29 | 36/22 | 50.45 ± 1.83/49.12 ± 1.97 | 3 | 1.27 ± 0.11/1.35 ± 1.02 | TG | Prednisone |
| Luo Zhimou [ | 2014 | NS | 44/30 | — | 47.28 ± 3.17/47.28 ± 3.17 | 6 | 3.4 ± 0.3 | TG | CTX |
| Liu Shusheng [ | 2014 | NS | 50/50 | 53/47 | 1.5–14/2–13 | 12 | — | TG | Hormone |
| Zhou Huiqing [ | 2014 | NS | 50/50 | 56/44 | 34.3 ± 1.2 | 12–18 | 2.1 ± 0.1 | TG | Prednisone |
| Lv Lihua [ | 2017 | NS | 20/20 | 24/16 | 63.14 ± 9.07/62.32 ± 8.08 | 12 | 6.2 ± 1.4/5.3 ± 1.8 | TG | Prednisone |
| Zhang Baoguo [ | 2019 | NS | 30/30 | 37/23 | 51.02 ± 5.84/51.06 ± 5.99 | 12 | — | TG | Prednisone |
| Liu Yi [ | 2017 | RNS | 42/42 | 48/36 | 36.72 ± 5.41/37.12 ± 5.83 | 12 | 3.26 ± 1.18/3.45 ± 1.27 | TG | Prednisone |
| Zhang Tingting [ | 2018 | RNS | 31/31 | 34/28 | 54.21 ± 3.74/55.09 ± 3.48 | 3 | — | LEFT + TG | CTX + prednisone |
| Liu Qian [ | 2016 | RNS | 30/30 | 25/35 | 36.9 ± 4.3/36.6 ± 4.2 | 6 | 9.9 ± 3.1/9.5 ± 3.6 | TG + MMF | Routine + CTX + hormone |
| Niu Qing [ | 2017 | RNS | 45/45 | 47/43 | 63.25 ± 3.21/64.25 ± 4.23 | 3 | 8.2 ± 3.2/8.6 ± 3 | TG | CTX |
| Guo Yong [ | 2018 | RNS | 30/30 | 33/27 | 56.4 ± 11.2/57.1 ± 12.3 | 6 | 3.7 ± 1.1/3.6 ± 1.2 | LEFT + TG | CTX + prednisone |
| Guo Xiaoping [ | 2017 | RNS | 85/85 | 88/82 | 35.19 ± 5.98/36.54 ± 6.07 | 4 | 1.01 ± 0.23/0.92 ± 0.22 | TG | MMF |
| Wan Lin [ | 2015 | RNS | 104/84 | 122/65 | 51.8 ± 12.2/45.3 ± 11.8 | 1 | — | TG | Dexamethasone |
| Jiao Linjuan [ | 2020 | RNS | 53/53 | 57/49 | 36.19 ± 4.82/35.48 ± 4.5 | 12 | 3.17 ± 0.42/3.24 ± 1.06 | TG | Prednisone acetate |
| Chen Hui [ | 2015 | RNS | 42/40 | 36/46 | 34.7 ± 6.2/35.1 ± 6.7 | 6 | 0.82 ± 0.38/0.85 ± 0.4 | TG | Routine + prednisone + MMF |
| Xu Hua [ | 2019 | RNS | 31/31 | 51/11 | 39.68 ± 3.27/35.97 ± 3.45 | 6 | 0.83 ± 0.11/0.83 ± 0.12 | TG | MMF |
| Wang Xiaoxue [ | 2016 | RNS | 40/40 | 47/33 | 34.9 ± 7.6/35.6 ± 6.4 | 3 | 3.5 ± 1.4/3.7 ± 1.3 | TG | Prednisone |
| Wang Maohe [ | 2014 | RNS | 33/33 | 36/30 | 35.1 ± 2.7/34.6 ± 2.4 | 12 | 3.5 ± 2.1/3.6 ± 1.9 | TG | Prednisone |
| Xu Qingyun [ | 2016 | RNS | 40/40 | 47/33 | 39.3 ± 27.9/45.1 ± 36.9 | 2 | 6.2 ± 5.9/5.8 ± 4.7 | TG | Glucocorticoid |
| Fan Deyong [ | 2014 | RNS | 48/48 | 53/43 | 34.6 ± 7.4/35.2 ± 7.8 | 12 | 3.2 ± 1.2/3.3 ± 1.3 | TG | Basic + prednisone |
| Xia Sufang [ | 2017 | PNS | 71/71 | 79/63 | 76.5 ± 3.2/72.6 ± 2.3 | 6 | — | TG | Prednisone |
| Wang Yongqing [ | 2014 | PNS | 17/17 | 18/16 | 51.12 ± 10.39 | 2 | — | TG | Prednisone |
| Li Han [ | 2017 | PNS | 47/47 | 46/48 | 68.21 ± 1.79/67.45 ± 1.54 | 2 | 0.83 ± 0.089/0.82 ± 0.094 | TG | Prednisone |
| Jiang Ganru [ | 2014 | PNS | 32/28 | 34/26 | 56.4 ± 12/55.4 ± 11.2 | 6 | 2.13 ± 0.42/2.21 ± 0.38 | LEFT + TG + prednisone | CTX + prednisone |
| Bao Yu [ | 2013 | PNS | 36/36 | 48/24 | 69.2 ± 8.06 | >6 | 0.74 ± 0.45 | TG | Prednisone |
| Tian Junwei [ | 2017 | PNS | 140/140 | 151/129 | 72.19 ± 9.45/71.34 ± 9.28 | 2 | 2.92 ± 1.12/2.87 ± 1.15 | TG | Prednisone + CTX |
| Lou Xuehang [ | 2014 | PNS | 19/22 | 24/17 | 60.6 ± 1.6/62.1 ± 5.8 | 12 | — | TG + hormone | CTX + hormone |
| Zhu Junli [ | 2020 | PNS | 44/44 | 47/41 | 71.96 ± 8.63 | 3 | 1.99 ± 0.96 | TG | Regular + benazepril |
| Zhang Qian [ | 2019 | PNS | 51/51 | 48/54 | 71.02 ± 9.44/72.13 ± 8.76 | 2 | 2.47 ± 0.34/2.56 ± 0.37 | TG | Regular + ramipril |
| Ning Xiaoli [ | 2019 | PNS | 44/44 | 52/36 | 49.53 ± 7.11 | 3 | — | TG | Hormone + LEFT |
| Xu Xiaoqin [ | 2020 | PNS | 35/35 | 45/25 | 43.21 ± 5.16/43.23 ± 5.15 | 3 | 5.08 ± 0.36/5.06 ± 0.35 | TG | Prednisone |
| Jiang Liangyan [ | 2013 | PNS | 41/41 | 47/34 | 69.11 ± 5.51 | 9–12 | 1.34 ± 0.7 | TG | Prednisone |
| Chen Weiwei [ | 2013 | PNS | 32/32 | 44/20 | 67.7 ± 5.6 | 12–18 | 0.4 ± 0.21 | TG | Prednisone |
| Chen Yuanshu [ | 2018 | PNS | 38/38 | 44/32 | 48.87 ± 8.09/49.76 ± 8.21 | 3 | 2.41 ± 0.82/2.32 ± 0.76 | TG | Prednisone acetate tablets + basic |
| Xu Junsan [ | 2017 | PNS | 48/46 | 49/45 | 73.47 ± 4.31/73.81 ± 4.58 | 12 | — | TG | CTX |
| Li Weichao [ | 2013 | PNS | 15/15 | 17/13 | 29.3 ± 3.8 | 6 | — | TG | Prednisone |
| Zhou Zhenzhong [ | 2015 | PNS | 20/20 | 23/17 | 65.23 ± 8.23/64.84 ± 7.42 | 4 | 0.79 ± 0.36/0.77 ± 0.44 | TG | Prednisone |
| Li Xiaohong [ | 2015 | PNS | 40/40 | 47/33 | 53.5 ± 3.1/54 ± 3.3 | — | 1.6 ± 0.1/1.7 ± 0.2 | TG | Prednisone + CTX |
| Liu Jinping [ | 2016 | PNS | 38/38 | 42/34 | 54.2 ± 3.7/54.1 ± 4.1 | 12 | 1.4 ± 1/1.5 ± 0.1 | TG | Prednisone + CTX |
| Yang Yonglin [ | 2018 | MN | 47/44 | 52/39 | 66.62 ± 4.19/66.21 ± 3.98 | 6 | — | TG | Benazepril |
| Qu Wei [ | 2016 | MN | 28/28 | 20/36 | 45.07 ± 11.93/38.82 ± 12.58 | 12 | — | TG | Losartan potassium tablets |
| Mo Yaomei [ | 2019 | MN | 21/21 | 23/19 | 50.2 ± 9.08/49.8 ± 10.16 | 6 | — | TG | Basics + MMF + prednisone |
| chen Ye [ | 2018 | IgAN | 25/24 | 33/16 | 9.3 ± 1.2/9.1 ± 1.1 | 3 | — | Basic + prednisone + TG | Basic + prednisone |
Note. T represents the experimental group and C represents the control group. M means male and F means female. “—” indicates that it is not reported or does not need to be reported. Drug dosage: glucocorticoid, 1 mg/(kg·d); (methyl)prednisone, 1–1.5 mg/kg·d; TG, 1–1.5 mg/kg·d; CTX, 8 mg/(kg·d); dipyridamole, 50 mg/time. Other drug dosages are not indicated in the literature.
Figure 2The literature is included in the quality evaluation map.
Results of meta-analysis of clinical efficacy.
| Subgroup analysis | No. of studies | Weighted combination | Heterogeneity | Egger's bias | Metaregression | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR [95% conf. interval] |
|
|
| ||||
|
| |||||||
| NS | 31 | 3.337 (2.649, 4.203) |
| 22.7% |
|
|
|
| RNS | 14 | 4.141 (3.037, 5.646) |
| 0.0% |
|
| |
| PNS | 17 | 2.822 (2.109, 3.776) |
| 0.0% |
|
| |
| MN | 3 | 4.761 (2.182, 10.385) |
| 0.0% |
|
| |
| IgAN | 1 | 4.000 (1.129, 14.175) |
| — | — | — | |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| Single drug | 6 | 4.037 (2.241, 7.272) |
| 0.0% |
|
|
|
| Combined use of drugs | 60 | 3.373 (2.882, 3.947) |
| 0.0% |
|
| |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| <6 months | 20 | 3.705 (2.854, 4.809) |
| 0.0% |
|
|
|
| ≥6 months | 28 | 3.318 (2.622, 4.198) |
| 0.0% |
|
| |
| ≥12 months | 17 | 3.104 (2.272, 4.240) |
| 26.6% |
|
| |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| 0–18 | 2 | 4.981 (2.006, 12.365) |
| 0.0% |
| — |
|
| 19–65 | 45 | 3.591 (2.974, 4.337) |
| 0.0% |
|
| |
| >66 | 18 | 3.454 (2.606, 4.577) |
| 0.0% |
|
| |
| Not reported | 1 | 0.167 (0.034, 0.805) |
| — | — | — | — |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| — |
Figure 3Comparison of clinical efficacy of different types of diseases between the experimental group and the control group.
Figure 4Comparison of recurrence between the experimental group and control group.
Results of meta-analysis of 24-hour urinary protein.
| Subgroup analysis | No. of studies | Weighted combination | Heterogeneity | Egger's bias | Metaregression | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WMD [95% conf. interval] |
|
|
| ||||
|
| |||||||
| NS | 25 | −0.690 (−0.829, −0.551) |
| 94.2% |
|
|
|
| RNS | 12 | −0.500 (−0.629, −0.370) |
| 77.7% |
|
| |
| PNS | 13 | −6.092 (−7.171, −5.014) |
| 99.8% |
|
| |
| MN | 3 | −0.290 (−0.533, −0.048) |
| 59.2% |
|
| |
| IgAN | 1 | −1.400 (−2.615, −0.185) |
| — | — | — | |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| Single drug | 5 | −0.531 (−0.612, −0.451) |
| 85% |
|
|
|
| Combined use of drugs | 49 | −0.501 (−0.525, −0.477) |
| 99.1% |
|
| |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| <6 months | 17 | −0.531 (−0.563, −0.498) |
| 99.7% |
|
|
|
| ≥6 months | 22 | −0.506 (−0.553, −0.459) |
| 94.9% |
|
| |
| ≥12 months | 14 | −0.442 (−0.485, −0.399) |
| 74.1% |
|
| |
| Not reported | 1 | −1.720 (−2.140, −1.300) |
| — | — | — | |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| 0–18 | 1 | −0.657 (−0.766, −0.547) |
| — | — | — |
|
| 19–65 | 39 | −0.606 (−0.824, −0.388) |
| 93.4% |
| — | |
| >66 | 14 | −4.871 (−5.827, −3.915) |
| 99.7% |
| — | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| — |
Figure 5Comparison of 24-hour urinary protein in patients with different types of diseases between the experimental group and the control group.
Meta-analysis of reducing serum creatinine level in the experimental group and control group.
| Subgroup analysis | No. of studies | Weighted combination | Heterogeneity | Egger's bias | Metaregression | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WMD [95% conf. interval] |
|
|
| ||||
|
| |||||||
| NS | 15 | −11.764 (−14.967, −8.561) |
| 96.2% |
|
|
|
| RNS | 6 | −6.479 (−8.960, −3.998) |
| 11.5% |
|
| |
| PNS | 8 | −11.101 (−13.966, −8.235) |
| 36.2% |
|
| |
| MN | 2 | 2.304 (−20.951, 25.558) |
| 92.1% |
|
| |
|
| |||||||
| Single drug | 1 | −8.13 (−12.039, −7.233) |
| 0.0% |
| — |
|
| Combined use of drugs | 30 | −9.688 (−12.133, −7.243) |
| 94.4% |
|
| |
|
| |||||||
| <6 months | 11 | −12.520 (−16.473, −8.566) |
| 78.8% |
|
|
|
| ≥6 months | 14 | −6.177 (−8.431, −3.924) |
| 90.1% |
|
| |
| ≥12 months | 6 | −3.029 (−9.316, 3.258) |
| 76.4% |
|
| |
| Not reported | 1 | −66.320 (−76.691, −55.949) |
| — | — | — | |
|
| |||||||
| 19–65 | 21 | −9.049 (−11.740, −6.357) |
| 94.7% |
|
| |
| >66 | 10 | −11.120 (−13.762, −8.478) |
| 46.6% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 6Comparison of serum creatinine level of drug intervention between the experimental group and control group with different types of diseases.
Meta-analysis of reducing blood urea nitrogen level in the experimental group and control group.
| Subgroup analysis | No. of studies | Weighted combination | Heterogeneity | Egger's bias | Metaregression | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WMD [95% conf. interval] |
|
|
| ||||
|
| |||||||
| NS | 12 | −0.536 (−0.832, −0.241) |
| 69.1% |
| 0.416 |
|
| RNS | 6 | −0.000 (−0.847, 0.846) |
| 97% |
| 0.252 | |
| PNS | 4 | −0.114 (−1.360, 1.132) |
| 95% |
| 0.061 | |
| MN | 2 | −0.555 (−1.204, 0.095) |
| 0.0% | 0.673 | — | |
|
| |||||||
| Single drug | 1 | −0.93 (−1.536, 0.324) |
| 84.3% |
| — |
|
| Combined use of drugs | 23 | −0.298 (−0.644, 0.049) |
| 91.6% |
|
| |
|
| |||||||
| <6 months | 6 | −0.38 (−1.07, 0.31) |
| 93.2% |
|
|
|
| ≥6 months | 14 | −0.235 (−0.693, 0.223) |
| 90.6% |
|
| |
| ≥12 months | 4 | −0.484 (−0.859, −0.108) |
| 27.3% |
|
| |
|
| |||||||
| 19–65 | 17 | −0.325 (−0.722, 0.071) |
| 92.2% |
|
| |
| >66 | 7 | −0.310 (−1.046, 0.426) |
| 89.9% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 7Comparison of drug intervention on blood urea nitrogen between the experimental group and control group of different types of diseases.
Meta-analysis of elevated serum albumin levels in the experimental group and the control group.
| Subgroup analysis | No. of studies | Weighted combination | Heterogeneity | Egger's bias | Metaregression | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WMD [95% conf. interval] |
|
|
| ||||
|
| |||||||
| NS | 20 | 4.407 (2.843, 5.971) |
| 92.3% |
|
|
|
| RNS | 12 | 5.726 (3.692, 7.760) |
| 95.1% |
|
| |
| PNS | 10 | 3.796 (1.347, 6.245) |
| 94.7% |
|
| |
| MN | 2 | 2.34 (-0.793, 5.483) |
| 38.2% |
|
| |
| IgAN | 1 | 4.600 (0.484, 8.716) |
| — | — | — | |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| Single drug | 5 | 5.649 (4.712, 6.585) |
| 17.7% |
|
|
|
| Combined use of drugs | 40 | 4.448 (3.296, 5.600) |
| 93.9% |
|
| |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| <6 months | 14 | 4.679 (3.050, 6.309) |
| 92.4% |
|
|
|
| ≥6 months | 16 | 5.483 (3.455, 7.510) |
| 94.2% |
|
| |
| ≥12 months | 14 | 3.154 (1.468, 4.84) |
| 91.3% |
|
| |
| Not reported | 1 | 7.920 (5.581, 10.259) |
| — | — | — | |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| 0–18 | 1 | 4.600 (0.484, 8.716) |
| — |
| — |
|
| 19–65 | 35 | 4.606 (3.470, 5.743) |
| 91.3% |
|
| |
| >66 | 12 | 4.438 (2.110, 6.765) |
| 96.1% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 8Comparison of drug intervention on serum albumin between the experimental group and the control group with different types of diseases.
Meta-analysis of the incidence of total adverse events.
| Subgroup analysis | No. of studies | Weighted combination | Heterogeneity | Egger's bias | Metaregression | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR [95% conf. interval] |
|
|
| ||||
|
| |||||||
| NS | 19 | 0.537 (0.399, 0.722) |
| 57.9% |
|
|
|
| RNS | 6 | 0.415 (0.248, 0.693) |
| 0.0% |
|
| |
| PNS | 9 | 0.493 (0.330, 0.737) |
| 14.2% |
|
| |
| MN | 1 | 1.412 (0.275, 7.257) |
| — | — | — | |
| IgAN | 1 | 3.556 (1.095, 11.546) |
| — | — | — | |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| Single drug | 4 | 0.458 (0.234, 0.899) |
| 41.2% |
|
|
|
| Combined use of drugs | 32 | 0.577 (0.465, 0.716) |
| 49.9% |
|
| |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| <6 months | 9 | 0.616 (0.422, 0.900) |
| 61.1% |
|
|
|
| ≥6 months | 19 | 0.580 (0.438, 0.769) |
| 51.4% |
|
| |
| ≥12 months | 7 | 0.293 (0.159, 0.540) |
| 0.0% |
|
| |
| Not reported | 1 | 1.000 (0.219, 4.564) |
| — | — | — | |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| 0–18 | 2 | 0.819 (0.371, 1.808) |
| 91.0% |
| — |
|
| 19–65 | 25 | 0.541 (0.418, 0.701) |
| 44.5% |
|
| |
| >66 | 9 | 0.505 (0.340, 0.749) |
| 24.7% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 9Comparison of adverse reactions caused by drugs in different types of experimental group and control group.
Meta-analysis of the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse reactions.
| Subgroup analysis | No. of studies | Weighted combination | Heterogeneity | Egger's bias | Metaregression | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR [95% conf. interval] |
|
|
| ||||
|
| |||||||
| NS | 16 | 0.604 (0.391, 0.932) |
| 0.0% |
|
|
|
| RNS | 4 | 0.890 (0.414, 1.913) |
| 17.6% |
|
| |
| PNS | 8 | 0.686 (0.340, 1.383) |
| 0.0% |
|
| |
| MN | 2 | 1.859 (0.493, 7.002) |
| 0.0% |
|
| |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| Single drug | 3 | 0.737 (0.258, 2.105) |
| 0.0% | 0.455 |
|
|
| Combined use of drugs | 27 | 0.727 (0.523, 1.011) |
| 0.0% | 0.73 |
| |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| <6 months | 8 | 0.783 (0.428, 1.433) |
| 61.4% |
|
|
|
| ≥6 months | 15 | 0.796 (0.520, 1.218) |
| 51.4% |
|
| |
| ≥12 months | 7 | 0.501 (0.236, 1.063) |
| 40.2% |
|
| |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| 0–18 | 1 | 2.211 (0.484, 10.092) |
| 91.0% |
| — |
|
| 19–65 | 20 | 0.711 (0.482, 1.047) |
| 47.7% |
|
| |
| >66 | 9 | 0.642 (0.356, 1.159) |
| 24.7% |
|
| |
|
|
| 0.711 (0.517, 0.980) |
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 10Comparison of gastrointestinal adverse reactions induced by drugs in different types of diseases between the experimental group and the control group.
Figure 11Comparison of the intervention of drugs on leukopenia between the experimental group and the control group.
Figure 12Comparison of liver injury induced by drugs in the experimental group and the control group.
Figure 13Comparison of respiratory tract infection caused by drugs in the experimental group and the control group.
Figure 14Comparison of dizziness and headache caused by drugs in the experimental group and the control group.
Figure 15Comparison of the increase of blood glucose induced by drugs in the experimental group and the control group.
Figure 16Evaluation of evidence quality of outcome indicators of TGt in the treatment of chronic nephropathy.