4.5 Review

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of a traditional Chinese medicine prescription, modified RunChang-Tang, in treating functional constipation

期刊

MEDICINE
卷 100, 期 20, 页码 -

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000025760

关键词

functional constipation; herbal formula; laxatives; modified Runchang-Tang; traditional Chinese medicine

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology of Sichuan Province [2015SZ0134]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The meta-analysis demonstrates that modified Runchang-Tang treatment is effective and safe for functional constipation. Additional well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.
Background: Modified Runchang-Tang (MRCT), a Chinese herbal medicine, is widely used to treat functional constipation (FC), which is a common digestive system disease. However, its efficacy has not been evaluated systematically and objectively. Thus, a meta-analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of MRCT for treating functional constipation. Methods: We searched for relevant publications from Embase, Medline, The Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Scientific Journals Database, and Wanfang Data for relevant literature. The timeframe of retrieval was set from the founding date of each database to July 15, 2020. Result: A total of 26 randomized controlled trials with 2103 individuals were included in this meta-analysis. All trials were conducted in mainland China and were written in Chinese. The results showed that MRCT monotherapy provided better symptom relief in FC patients compared to prokinetic agent monotherapy (odds ratio, [OR] = 4.06), osmotic laxatives (OR = 4.39) and stimulant laxatives (OR = 2.99). Additionally, there were no obvious adverse effects in MRCT group compared with control group. Conclusion: MRCT treatment is an efficient and safe treatment for FC. However, considering the limitations of this study, further well-designed randomized controlled trials are required to validate this conclusion.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据