摘要
目的:以西药利巴韦林为参照,系统评价4种中药注射液治疗小儿急性上呼吸道感染的疗效与安全性,为临床提供循证依据。方法:计算机检索CNKI、VIP、WanFang Data、SinoMed、PubMed、Cochrane Library、Embase等数据库和相关临床注册平台(ChiCTR、ClinicalTrials.gov),搜集关于热毒宁注射液、痰热清注射液、喜炎平注射液、炎琥宁注射液及利巴韦林注射液(以下分别简称“热毒宁”“痰热清”“喜炎平”“炎琥宁”“利巴韦林”)治疗小儿急性上呼吸道感染的随机对照试验(RCT),检索时限均为2014年1月~2021年5月。由两名研究者独立筛选文献、提取资料并评价纳入研究的偏倚风险后,使用GeMTC软件和Stata 14.0软件进行网状Meta分析。结果:共纳入31项研究,累计4116例患者。网状Meta分析结果显示:在临床总有效率方面,4种中药注射液皆优于利巴韦林(P<0.05),热毒宁优于喜炎平(P<0.05),痰热清优于炎琥宁(P<0.05),最佳概率排序:痰热清>热毒宁>喜炎平=炎琥宁=利巴韦林。在退热时间方面,4种中药注射液皆短于利巴韦林(P<0.05),痰热清短于炎琥宁(P<0.05),最佳概率排序:痰热清=热毒宁>喜炎平>炎琥宁>利巴韦林。在咳嗽消退时间方面,热毒宁、喜炎平、痰热清皆短于利巴韦林(P<0.05),痰热清短于炎琥宁(P<0.05),最佳概率排序:痰热清=热毒宁>喜炎平>炎琥宁>利巴韦林。在鼻塞流涕消失时间方面,热毒宁短于利巴韦林(P<0.05),最佳概率排序:热毒宁>炎琥宁>痰热清>喜炎平>利巴韦林;在药品不良反应发生率方面,热毒宁低于利巴韦林(P<0.05),最佳概率排序:热毒宁=喜炎平=炎琥宁>利巴韦林>痰热清。结论:当前证据表明,以上治疗小儿急性上呼吸道感染的4种中药注射液疗效可能均优于利巴韦林,痰热清注射液可能为疗效最佳药物,热毒宁、喜炎平和炎琥宁可能为安全性最佳药物。
Objective:To systematically review efficacy and safety of four kinds of Chinese medicine injection for children with acute upper respiratory tract infection taking ribavirin as a reference,to provide evidence-based basis for the clinical.Methods:The database of CNKI,VIP,WanFang Data,SinoMed,Chinese Clinical Trial Registry(ChiCTR),PubMed,Cochrane Library,Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials(RCTs)of Reduning injection,Tanreqing injection,Xiyanping injection,Yanhuning injection and ribavirin injection in the treatment of children with acute upper respiratory tract infection from January 2014 to May 2021.Two reviewers independently screened literature,extracted data,and assessed the risk of bias of included studies.Network meta-analysis was then performed using GeMTC software and Stata 14.0 software.Results:A total of 31 studies involving 4116 patients were included.The results of network meta-analysis showed:in terms of the total effective rate,all four kinds of Chinese medicine injection were better than ribavirin(P<0.05),Reduning was better than Xiyanping(P<0.05),Tanreqing was better than Yanhuning(P<0.05),and the best probability ranking was:Tanreqing>Reduning>Xiyanping=Yanhuning=ribavirin.In terms of the time of fever reduction,the four kinds of Chinese medicine injection were shorter than ribavirin(P<0.05),Tanreqing was shorter than Yanhuning(P<0.05),and the best probability ranking was:Tanreqing=Reduning>Xiyanping>Yanhuning>ribavirin.In terms of cough subside time,Reduning,Xiyanping and Tanreqing were shorter than ribavirin(P<0.05),Tanreqing was shorter than Yanhuning(P<0.05),and the best probability ranking was:Tanreqing=Reduning>Xiyanping>Yanhuning>ribavirin.In terms of the disappearance time of nasal congestion,Reduning was shorter than ribavirin(P<0.05),and the best probability ranking was:Reduning>Yanhuning>Tanreqing>Xiyanping>ribavirin;In terms of the incidence of adverse reactions,Reduning was lower than ribavirin(P<0.05),and the best probabi
作者
向丽镕
郑良栋
徐元翠
Xiang Lirong;Zheng Liangdong;Xu Yuancui(Department of Pharmacy,Chinese Medicine Department,the Central Hospital of Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture,Enshi 445000,Hubei,China)
出处
《药物流行病学杂志》
CAS
2022年第5期296-302,313,共8页
Chinese Journal of Pharmacoepidemiology
关键词
中药注射液
急性上呼吸道感染
小儿
网状Meta分析
随机对照试验
Traditional Chinese medicine injection
Acute upper respiratory tract infection
Children
Network meta-analysis
Randomized controlled trial
