Chinese patent medicine for atherosclerosis: a systematic review and Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Abstract

Objective: To synthesize the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the efficacy and safety of Chinese patent medicine (CPM) on atherosclerosis (AS) or with a high risk of atherosclerosis.

Methods: All RCTs in three databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library) were included from the inception of the database to September 20, 2019. The methodological evaluation of the included trials was carried out using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 software. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to evaluate the quality of evidence.

Results: Eighteen RCTs were included, involving a total of 3885 patients with AS or with a high risk of AS. Most trials had favorable methodology. Meta-analysis suggested significant differences in clinical endpoint (n = 1938, RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.69, P < 0.00001; I ² = 0%); the change in carotid artery IMT (n = 1723, MD -0.09, 95% CI －0.14 to -0.04, P < 0.001; I ² = 40%); change in FMD (n = 239, MD 0.87, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.21, P < 0.00001; I ² = 0%); change in high sensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) (n = 1527, MD －1.89, 95% CI －3.36 to －0.42, P = 0.01; I ² = 94%) and incidence of total adverse events (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.93, P = 0.009; I ² = 40%) in favor of the experimental group. However, meta-analysis showed no significant differences in the change in low-density lipoprotein-C (LDL-C) (n = 2419, MD －0.19, 95% CI －0.50 to 0.12, P = 0.22, I ² = 94%) between the experimental and control groups.

Conclusion: CPM could have certain clinical efficacy in the treatment of AS. However, more double-blinded placebo-controlled RCTs are required in further evaluations to provide stronger evidence.