摘要
目的:系统评价金刚藤治疗盆腔炎的临床疗效和安全性。方法:计算机检索Cochrane Library、MEDLINE(Ovid)、EMBASE、Pub Med(2014,Issue 2)、VIP、Wan Fang database、CNKI、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM),并手工检索相关领域的杂志,收集金刚藤治疗盆腔炎的临床随机对照试验(RCT)。文献年限为1979年3月—2014年7月,检索汉语及中文文献。按照纳入和排除标准,由两名评价员独立评价文献质量、提取资料并交叉核对后,采用Rev Man 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果:检索符合RCTs纳入标准的金刚藤治疗盆腔炎的随机对照试验论文共8篇,总共1664例盆腔炎性疾病患者。Meta分析结果显示:在总有效率方面,金刚藤联合西药组优于妇科千金片联合西药组,2组差异有统计学意义[OR=3.14,95%CI(1.68,5.90),P=0.000 4<0.05];金刚藤组优于中成药组,2组差异有统计学意义[OR=3.87,95%CI(1.85,8.10),P=0.000 3<0.05];金刚藤组优于司帕沙星组,2组差异有统计学意义[OR=5.55,95%CI(1.52,20.27),P=0.009<0.05]。在完全缓解率方面,金刚藤组优于对照组,2组差异有统计学意义[OR=2.90,95%CI(1.58,5.32),P=0.000 6<0.05]。在复发率方面,金刚藤组复发率低于西药组,2组差异有统计学意义[OR=0.19,95%CI(0.07,0.53),P=0.001<0.05]。在不良反应方面,无统计学意义[OR=0.34,95%CI(0.06,1.99),P=0.23>0.05]。结论:目前有限的纳入研究初步显示金刚藤治疗盆腔炎性疾病安全,在改善症状等方面较对照组有效,但因该系统评价纳入研究的方法学质量较低,且诊断标准、随访时间、结果测量指标和判效标准均不一致,因此临床研究质量有待提高。
Objective ： To systematically assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of Jingangteng in the treatment of pelvic inflammatory disease. Methods ： We conducted electronic searching on the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed （February 2013 ）, VIP, WanFang database, CNKI and CBM to collect the randomized controlled trials （ RCTs ）on treating chronic pelvic inflammatory disease with Jingangteng. We also handsearched some related journals. The literatures were limited from 1979.1 to 2014.7 in both Chinese and English. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, quality assessment and data extraction were conducted by two reviewers independently. Disagreement was resolved through discussion and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. Results： Researching the randomized controlled trials theses that fit the RCTs inclusion criteria in treating pelvic inflammatory disease with Jingangteng was 8, total of 1664 cases were enrolled. The results of meta-analysis showed that the total effective rate of the Jingangteng group with western medicine was significantly higher than that of the Qianjianpian group with western medicine[OR=3.14,95%CI （ 1.68, 5.90 ）, P=0.000 4〈0.05], and significant differences were noted in the total remission rate[OR=2.90, 95%CI（ 1.58,5.32 ）,P=0.000 6〈0.05]and the relapse rate[OR=0.19,95%CI（ 0.07,0.53 ）,P=0.001〈0.05]. One RCT reported adverse effects and meta-analyses showed that the incidence of adverse effects was no significantly difference in the Jingangteng group and the Fuyankang[OR=0.34,95%CI （ 0.06,1.99 ）, P=0.23〉0.05]. Conclusion ： Jingangteng therapy is effective in the treatment of pelvic inflammatory disease, but its superiority over control is not demonstrated due to poor quality and small sample of the included trials. More large-scale, multi-center, well-designed, scientific method to standardize the quality of randomized controlled trials are needed.
出处
《辽宁中医药大学学报》
CAS
2015年第8期151-155,共5页
Journal of Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine
关键词
金刚藤
盆腔炎性疾病
安全性
随机对照
系统评价
META-分析
Jingangteng
pelvic inflammatory disease
safety
randomized controlled
systematicreview
meta-analyses
