Cargando…

Efficacy and Safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Until now, there is no clinically approved specific medicine to treat COVID-19. Prior systematic reviews (SRs) have shown that traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) reduces the number of patients with severe disease and time to fever clearance, promotes clinical effectiveness, and improve...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Heping, Xu, Bowen, Zhang, Ying, Duan, Yuanyuan, Gao, Ruike, He, Haoqiang, Li, Xiuyang, Li, Jie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8379002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34421581
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.609213
_version_ 1783740919433920512
author Wang, Heping
Xu, Bowen
Zhang, Ying
Duan, Yuanyuan
Gao, Ruike
He, Haoqiang
Li, Xiuyang
Li, Jie
author_facet Wang, Heping
Xu, Bowen
Zhang, Ying
Duan, Yuanyuan
Gao, Ruike
He, Haoqiang
Li, Xiuyang
Li, Jie
author_sort Wang, Heping
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Until now, there is no clinically approved specific medicine to treat COVID-19. Prior systematic reviews (SRs) have shown that traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) reduces the number of patients with severe disease and time to fever clearance, promotes clinical effectiveness, and improves chest images and the negativity rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acid test. Few SRs arrived at a definitive conclusion, and more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were published. We conducted this study to summarize the latest evidence of TCM in COVID-19. Methods: Eight online databases were searched from December 2019 to July 2020, updated to March 2021. Only RCTs evaluating the clinical efficacy and safety of TCM in the treatment of COVID-19 were included. Primary outcomes were clinical cure and the negativity of the SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test. Secondary outcomes included clinical deterioration, ARDS, mechanical ventilation, death, time to fever clearance, duration of hospitalization, and chest imaging improvement. Safety outcomes included adverse events and serious adverse events during treatment. Two reviewers selected the included articles, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data independently and in duplicate. Results: A total of 25 RCTs involving 2222 participants were selected in the systematic review, and seven RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that TCM plus routine treatment was significantly better than routine treatment alone in clinical cure (risk ratio [RR] = 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.04, 1.38], P = 0.01) and chest image improvement (RR = 1.22, 95% CI [1.07, 1.39], P = 0.01) and could reduce clinical deterioration (RR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.18, 0.86], P = 0.02), ARDS (RR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.11, 0.69], P = 0.01), mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.30, 95% CI [0.12, 0.77], P = 0.01), or death rate (RR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.09, 0.84], P = 0.02). No significant difference between TCM and routine treatment in the negativity of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test (RR = 1.08, 95% CI [0.94, 1.23], P = 0.29) was observed. Finally, there was no overall significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. The summary of evidence showed moderate confidence of a benefit of 11.8% in clinical cure and 14.0% in chest image improvement and a reduction of 5.9% in clinical deterioration, 25.4% in ARDS, 18.3% in mechanical ventilation, and 4.5% in death with TCM plus routine treatment compared to routine treatment alone in patients with COVID-19. A low confidence of a benefit of 5.4% in the negativity of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test was also observed. Conclusions: Synethized evidence of 21 outcomes in 8 RCTs showed moderate certainty that TCM treatment plus routine treatment may promote a clinical cure and chest image improvement compared to routine treatment alone while reducing clinical deterioration, development of ARDS, use of mechanical ventilation, and death in patients with COVID-19. TCM treatment plus routine treatment may not promote the negativity of the SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test compared to routine treatment alone. TCM treatment was found to be safe for patients with COVID-19.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8379002
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83790022021-08-21 Efficacy and Safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Wang, Heping Xu, Bowen Zhang, Ying Duan, Yuanyuan Gao, Ruike He, Haoqiang Li, Xiuyang Li, Jie Front Pharmacol Pharmacology Introduction: Until now, there is no clinically approved specific medicine to treat COVID-19. Prior systematic reviews (SRs) have shown that traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) reduces the number of patients with severe disease and time to fever clearance, promotes clinical effectiveness, and improves chest images and the negativity rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acid test. Few SRs arrived at a definitive conclusion, and more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were published. We conducted this study to summarize the latest evidence of TCM in COVID-19. Methods: Eight online databases were searched from December 2019 to July 2020, updated to March 2021. Only RCTs evaluating the clinical efficacy and safety of TCM in the treatment of COVID-19 were included. Primary outcomes were clinical cure and the negativity of the SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test. Secondary outcomes included clinical deterioration, ARDS, mechanical ventilation, death, time to fever clearance, duration of hospitalization, and chest imaging improvement. Safety outcomes included adverse events and serious adverse events during treatment. Two reviewers selected the included articles, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data independently and in duplicate. Results: A total of 25 RCTs involving 2222 participants were selected in the systematic review, and seven RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that TCM plus routine treatment was significantly better than routine treatment alone in clinical cure (risk ratio [RR] = 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.04, 1.38], P = 0.01) and chest image improvement (RR = 1.22, 95% CI [1.07, 1.39], P = 0.01) and could reduce clinical deterioration (RR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.18, 0.86], P = 0.02), ARDS (RR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.11, 0.69], P = 0.01), mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.30, 95% CI [0.12, 0.77], P = 0.01), or death rate (RR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.09, 0.84], P = 0.02). No significant difference between TCM and routine treatment in the negativity of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test (RR = 1.08, 95% CI [0.94, 1.23], P = 0.29) was observed. Finally, there was no overall significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. The summary of evidence showed moderate confidence of a benefit of 11.8% in clinical cure and 14.0% in chest image improvement and a reduction of 5.9% in clinical deterioration, 25.4% in ARDS, 18.3% in mechanical ventilation, and 4.5% in death with TCM plus routine treatment compared to routine treatment alone in patients with COVID-19. A low confidence of a benefit of 5.4% in the negativity of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test was also observed. Conclusions: Synethized evidence of 21 outcomes in 8 RCTs showed moderate certainty that TCM treatment plus routine treatment may promote a clinical cure and chest image improvement compared to routine treatment alone while reducing clinical deterioration, development of ARDS, use of mechanical ventilation, and death in patients with COVID-19. TCM treatment plus routine treatment may not promote the negativity of the SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test compared to routine treatment alone. TCM treatment was found to be safe for patients with COVID-19. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-08-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8379002/ /pubmed/34421581 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.609213 Text en Copyright © 2021 Wang, Xu, Zhang, Duan, Gao, He, Li and Li. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Pharmacology
Wang, Heping
Xu, Bowen
Zhang, Ying
Duan, Yuanyuan
Gao, Ruike
He, Haoqiang
Li, Xiuyang
Li, Jie
Efficacy and Safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Efficacy and Safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Efficacy and Safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Efficacy and Safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy and Safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Efficacy and Safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort efficacy and safety of traditional chinese medicine in coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19): a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Pharmacology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8379002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34421581
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.609213
work_keys_str_mv AT wangheping efficacyandsafetyoftraditionalchinesemedicineincoronavirusdisease2019covid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT xubowen efficacyandsafetyoftraditionalchinesemedicineincoronavirusdisease2019covid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhangying efficacyandsafetyoftraditionalchinesemedicineincoronavirusdisease2019covid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT duanyuanyuan efficacyandsafetyoftraditionalchinesemedicineincoronavirusdisease2019covid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT gaoruike efficacyandsafetyoftraditionalchinesemedicineincoronavirusdisease2019covid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hehaoqiang efficacyandsafetyoftraditionalchinesemedicineincoronavirusdisease2019covid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lixiuyang efficacyandsafetyoftraditionalchinesemedicineincoronavirusdisease2019covid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lijie efficacyandsafetyoftraditionalchinesemedicineincoronavirusdisease2019covid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis