| Literature DB >> 36185085 |
Feng Li1,2, Yali Yuan1,3, Di Wu4, Junxiang Li3, Haixiao Han3, Xiaohong Li3, Liming Hu3, Runhua Chen3, Yupu Yao3, Yao Jiao1,3, Huihui Chen1,3, Tangyou Mao3, Chune Xie3.
Abstract
Objectives: Conventional approaches for patients with nonerosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (NERD) were not satisfactory. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and mechanisms of Chinese herbal medicine Hewei Jiangni Decoction (HWJND) as a novel and promising regimen for NERD.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36185085 PMCID: PMC9522514 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9647003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.650
Figure 1Outlines the study design.
Patient demographics and baseline clinical characteristics.
| Characteristics | Treatment group ( | Control group ( |
| Testing method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (mean, SD) | 48.05 ± 10.91 | 48.51 ± 10.31 | 0.823 | Student ‘s |
| Gender (%) | 0.204 | Chi-square test | ||
| Male | 12 (21.43) | 16 (30.19) | ||
| Female | 44 (78.57) | 37 (69.81) | ||
| Eating habits (%) | 0.398 | Chi-square test | ||
| Like to eat spicy greasy food | 16 (28.57) | 13 (24.53) | ||
| A balanced diet | 40 (71.43) | 40 (75.47) | ||
| Have the habit of drinking tea (%) | 0.463 | Chi-square test | ||
| Tea drinking habit | 12 (21.43) | 10 (18.87) | ||
| No habit of drinking tea | 44 (78.57) | 43 (81.13) | ||
| Have a history of smoking and alcohol abuse (%) | 0.465 | Chi-square test | ||
| Smoking and alcohol abuse | 4 (7.14) | 5 (9.43) | ||
| No history of smoking or alcohol abuse | 52 (92.86) | 48 (90.57) | ||
| Have a history of other diseases (%) | 0.569 | Chi-square test | ||
| History of other illnesses | 7 (12.50) | 7 (13.21) | ||
| No history of other diseases | 49 (87.50) | 46 (86.79) | ||
| Serum ALT (U/L) (Mean, SD) | 18.89 ± 10.08 | 17.62 ± 9.43 | 0.505 | Student ‘s |
| Serum AST (U/L) (Mean, SD) | 19.90 ± 5.08 | 19.08 ± 5.49 | 0.427 | Student ‘s |
| RBC (109/L) (Mean, SD) | 4.69 ± 0.45 | 4.69 ± 0.46 | 0.984 | Student ‘s |
| WBC (1012/L) (Mean, SD) | 5.93 ± 1.34 | 5.96 ± 1.30 | 0.904 | Student ‘s |
| PLT (109/L) (Mean, SD) | 247.30 ± 54.45 | 261.41 ± 59.09 | 0.202 | Student ‘s |
| BUN (mmol/L) (Mean, SD) | 4.78 ± 1.12 | 4.57 ± 1.29 | 0.362 | Student ‘s |
| Scr (umol/L) (Mean, SD) | 69.14 ± 11.60 | 68.27 ± 11.02 | 0.694 | Student ‘s |
| Weight (kg) (Mean, SD) | 63.18 ± 10.20 | 63.79 ± 9.73 | 0.749 | Student ‘s |
| BMI (kg/m2) (Mean, SD) | 23.52 ± 3.19 | 23.83 ± 3.39 | 0.630 | Student ‘s |
Figure 2HWJND improved the clinical symptoms of patients with NERD. (a) GERD-Q Scores; (b) Heartburn Scores; (c) Regurgitation Scores; (d) Epigastric Pain Scores; (e) Nausea Scores; (f) Sleep disturbance scores. Treatment group, n = 56; Control group, n = 53. P < 0.01; n.s., not significant.
Figure 3HWJND increased the physiological, psychological, and social abilities of patients with NERD. PRO Scores. Treatment group, n = 56; Control group, n = 53. P < 0.01; n.s., not significant.
Figure 4HWJND improved the quality of life of patients with NERD. (a) Physiological function scores;(b) Role physical scores;(c) Body pain scores;(d) General health scores;(e) Vitality scores;(f) Social function scores;(g) Role emotional scores;(h) Mental health scores. Treatment group, n = 56; Control group, n = 53. P < 0.01; P < 0.05; n.s., not significant.
Figure 5Safety assessment. (a) ALT levels; (b) AST levels; (c) BUN levels; (d) Scr levels. Treatment group, n = 56; Control group, n = 53. n.s., not significant.
Figure 6Network pharmacology. (a) Herbs-Compounds-Targets (H-C-T) network diagram; (b) PPI network diagram of targets for HWJND treating GERD; (c) Targets-Signal pathways network diagram; (d) GO enrichment analysis; (e) KEGG pathway enrichment analysis.
Figure 7The protein-ligand of the docking simulation. Molecular docking of the three important targets (TNF, IL6, IL1B) in the PPI network and the three most important active components (quercetin, beta-sitosterol, and naringenin) in the H-C-T network were performed.