Efficacy and Safety of Shexiang Baoxin Pill for Coronary Heart Disease after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: Shexiang Baoxin Pill (SBP) is a licensed Chinese herbal pharmaceutical that has been widely accustomed to treat coronary heart disease (CHD) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study points to systematically assess the efficacy and security of the combination of SBP with conventional western medicine in the treatment of CHD after PCI. METHODS: Databases including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and SINOMED were searched to collect RCTs on SBP in CHD after PCI before July 2021. Review Manager 5.3 was used to analyze the data. The Cochrane Collaboration Bias Risk Tool is used to assess the quality of methods. RESULTS: A total of 19 eligible trials of 2022 patients with CHD after PCI were finally included. The results of the aggregate evidence showed that, compared with routine western medicine treatment alone, the combination of SBP with conventional treatment trial groups could significantly reduce the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) of the patients (RR = 0.38, 95% CI (0.29, 0.51), P < 0.00001). SBP also significantly enhanced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (MD = 4.00, 95% CI (3.42, 4.58), P < 0.00001) and lessened N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP) levels (MD = −167.18, 95% CI (−174.80, −159.57), P < 0.00001). In addition, the inflammatory mediators and blood lipid index in the experimental group after the combined therapy were also mediated (P < 0.05). Moreover, SBP did not increase the incidence of adverse reactions during treatment. The results of subgroup analysis illustrated that the length of the intervention course might be the source of the heterogeneity of NT-pro-BNP and hs-CRP. CONCLUSION: SBP could demonstrate a beneficial role in patients with CHD after PCI of reducing the incidence of MACE and improving LVEF, NT-pro-BNP, inflammatory mediators, and blood lipid index. However, limited by the quantity and quality of eligible studies, the above conclusions required more standardized, rigorous, high-quality clinical trials to verify further.