4.5 Review

Red ginseng for treating erectile dysfunction: a systematic review

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 66, 期 4, 页码 444-450

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2008.03236.x

关键词

erectile dysfunction; meta-analysis; red ginseng; systematic review

资金

  1. Korean Intellectual Property Office
  2. Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AIMS Korean red ginseng (unskinned Panax ginseng before it is steamed or otherwise heated and subsequently dried) is one of the most widely used herbal remedies. This systematic review evaluates the current evidence for the effectiveness of red ginseng for treating erectile dysfunction. METHODS Systematic searches were conducted on 20 electronic databases without language restrictions. Hand-searches included conference proceedings and our files. All randomized clinical studies (RCT) of red ginseng as a treatment of erectile dysfunction were considered for inclusion. Methodological quality was assessed using the Jadad score. RESULTS Seven RCTs met all the inclusion criteria. Their methodological quality was low on average. Six of the included RCTs compared the therapeutic efficacy of red ginseng with placebo. The meta-analysis of these data showed a significant effect (n = 349, risk ratio, 2.40; 95% CI of 1.65, 3.51, p < 0.00001, heterogeneity: tau(2) = 0.05, chi(2) = 6.42, p = 0.27, I-2 = 22%). Subgroup analyses also showed beneficial effects of red ginseng in psychogenic erectile dysfunction (n = 135, risk ratio, 2.05; 95% CI of 1.33, 3.16, p = 0.001, heterogeneity: chi(2) = 0.08, p = 0.96, I-2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS Collectively these RCTs provide suggestive evidence for the effectiveness of red ginseng in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. However, the total number of RCTs included in the analysis, the total sample size and the methodological quality of the primary studies were too low to draw definitive conclusions. Thus more rigorous studies are necessary.

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