• Medicine · Apr 2024

    Meta Analysis

    Efficacy and safety of Buyang Huanwu Decoction in patients with spinal cord injury: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

    • Zhongcheng He, Silin Yang, Yuxi Tan, Yulin Liao, and Shigang Song.
    • Department of Orthopaedic, Panzhihua Central Hospital, Panzhihua, Sichuan Province, China.
    • Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Apr 19; 103 (16): e37865e37865.

    BackgroundThere has been growing interest in using the traditional Chinese herb Buyang Huanwu Decoction (BHD) as a potential treatment for spinal cord injury (SCI), owing to its long-used treatment for SCI in China. However, the efficacy and safety of BHD treatment for SCI remain widely skeptical. This meta-analysis aims to assess the safety and efficacy of BHD in managing SCI.MethodA comprehensive literature search was conducted across several databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and Sinomed, up to January 1, 2024. Randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating the safety or efficacy of BHD in SCI treatment were included. The analysis focused on 8 critical endpoints: Patient-perceived total clinical effective rate, American Spinal Cord Injury Association (ASIA) sensory score, ASIA motor score, somatosensory evoked potential, motor evoked potential, visual analog scale pain score, Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, and adverse events.ResultsThirteen studies comprising 815 participants met the inclusion criteria. No significant heterogeneity or publication bias was observed across the trials. The findings revealed significant improvements in the patient-perceived total clinical effective rate (OR = 3.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] = [2.43, 5.86]; P < .001), ASIA sensory score (mean difference [MD] = 8.22; 95% CI = [5.87, 10.56]; P < .001), ASIA motor score (MD = 7.16; 95% CI = [5.15, 9.18]; P < .001), somatosensory evoked potential (MD = 0.25; 95% CI = [0.03, 0.48]; P = .02), motor evoked potential (MD = 0.30; 95% CI = [0.14, 0.46]; P = .0002), and Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (MD = 1.99; 95% CI = [0.39, 3.58]; P = .01) in the BHD combination group compared to the control group. Additionally, there was a significant reduction in visual analog scale pain scores (MD = -0.81; 95% CI = [-1.52, -0.11]; P = .02) with BHD combination treatment, without a significant increase in adverse effects (OR = 0.68; 95% CI = [0.33, 1.41]; P = .3).ConclusionThe current evidence suggests that BHD is effective and safe in treating SCI, warranting consideration as a complementary and alternative therapy. However, given the low methodological quality of the included studies, further rigorous research is warranted to validate these findings.Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…