Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026
Comparative efficacy of Traditional Chinese Medicine classical prescriptions for angina pectoris: a network meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Liang Hai-Yi, Ji Xin-Yu, Liu Si-Qi, Zhao Shu-Han, Yang Fu-Yi, Du Bai, Shi Shuai
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of classical prescriptions from Shang han Lun (Treatise on Febrile Diseases) and Jin gui Yao lue (Synopsis of the Golden Chamber) combined with conventional biomedicine in the treatment of angina pectoris of coronary heart disease.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight commonly used Chinese and English databases were searched for relevant clinical studies published before 25 December 2024. Revman 5.4 and Stata14.0 software were used for data analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 131 studies involving 11,292 participants (5,660 in intervention groups and 5,632 in control groups) were included. Most classical prescriptions combined with conventional biomedical therapy showed favorable associations with improvements in angina pectoris efficiency, electrocardiogram (ECG) efficiency, and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) syndrome outcomes compared with conventional treatment alone. Subgroup analyses showed partially different patterns of relative efficacy among prescriptions, with LGZG demonstrating more consistent performance in stable angina pectoris, while other prescriptions showed variable rankings in unstable angina pectoris. For lipid-related and inflammatory outcomes, results were inconsistent across studies, and current evidence remains insufficient to support robust comparative conclusions among classical prescriptions. Regarding safety outcomes, GZFL combined with conventional biomedical therapy showed a relatively favorable safety profile, while other classical prescriptions demonstrated comparable rates of adverse events to conventional therapy.
CONCLUSION: Classical prescriptions combined with conventional biomedical therapy may be associated with improvements in clinical outcomes of angina pectoris, with an overall acceptable safety profile observed across most intervention. However, due to limitations in study quality, heterogeneity, and indirect comparisons, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Further high-quality, multicenter randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these observations.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251029216.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight commonly used Chinese and English databases were searched for relevant clinical studies published before 25 December 2024. Revman 5.4 and Stata14.0 software were used for data analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 131 studies involving 11,292 participants (5,660 in intervention groups and 5,632 in control groups) were included. Most classical prescriptions combined with conventional biomedical therapy showed favorable associations with improvements in angina pectoris efficiency, electrocardiogram (ECG) efficiency, and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) syndrome outcomes compared with conventional treatment alone. Subgroup analyses showed partially different patterns of relative efficacy among prescriptions, with LGZG demonstrating more consistent performance in stable angina pectoris, while other prescriptions showed variable rankings in unstable angina pectoris. For lipid-related and inflammatory outcomes, results were inconsistent across studies, and current evidence remains insufficient to support robust comparative conclusions among classical prescriptions. Regarding safety outcomes, GZFL combined with conventional biomedical therapy showed a relatively favorable safety profile, while other classical prescriptions demonstrated comparable rates of adverse events to conventional therapy.
CONCLUSION: Classical prescriptions combined with conventional biomedical therapy may be associated with improvements in clinical outcomes of angina pectoris, with an overall acceptable safety profile observed across most intervention. However, due to limitations in study quality, heterogeneity, and indirect comparisons, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Further high-quality, multicenter randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these observations.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251029216.