Limits...
Clinical effects of a standardized Chinese herbal remedy, Qili Qiangxin, as an adjuvant treatment in heart failure: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sun J, Zhang K, Xiong WJ, Yang GY, Zhang YJ, Wang CC, Lai L, Han M, Ren J, Lewith G, Liu JP - BMC Complement Altern Med (2016)

Bottom Line: However, there is at present no high quality review to evaluate the effects and safety of Qili Qiangxin for patients with HF.However, compared with conventional treatment alone, Qili Qiangxin plus conventional treatment demonstrated a significant reduction in major cardiovascular events (RR 0.46, 95 % CI 0.34 to 0.64) and a significant reduction in re-hospitalization rate due to HF (RR 0.49, 95 % CI 0.38 to 0.64).It appeared to significantly improve quality of life in patients with HF and data from RCTs suggested that Qili Qiangxin is likely safe.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Center for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.

ABSTRACT

Background: Qili Qiangxin capsule is a standardized Chinese herbal treatment that is commonly used in China for heart failure (HF) alongside conventional medical care. In 2014, Chinese guidelines for the treatment of chronic HF highlighted Qili Qiangxin capsules as a potentially effective medicine. However, there is at present no high quality review to evaluate the effects and safety of Qili Qiangxin for patients with HF.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis and followed methods described in our registered protocol [PROSPERO registration: CRD42013006106]. We searched 6 electronic databases to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) irrespective of blinding or placebo control of Qili Qiangxin used as an adjuvant treatment for HF.

Results: We included a total of 129 RCTs published between 2005 and 2015, involving 11,547 patients, aged 18 to 98 years. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference between Qili Qiangxin plus conventional treatment and conventional treatment alone for mortality (RR 0.53, 95 % CI 0.27 to 1.07). However, compared with conventional treatment alone, Qili Qiangxin plus conventional treatment demonstrated a significant reduction in major cardiovascular events (RR 0.46, 95 % CI 0.34 to 0.64) and a significant reduction in re-hospitalization rate due to HF (RR 0.49, 95 % CI 0.38 to 0.64). Qili Qiangxin also showed significant improvement in cardiac function measured by the New York Heart Association scale (RR 1.38, 95 % CI 1.29 to 1.48) and quality of life as measured by Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MD -8.48 scores, 95 % CI -9.56 to -7.39). There were no reports of serious adverse events relating to Qili Qiangxin administration. The majority of included trials were of poor methodological quality.

Conclusions: When compared with conventional treatment alone, Qili Qiangxin combined with conventional treatment demonstrated a significant effect in reducing cardiovascular events and re-hospitalization rate, though not in mortality. It appeared to significantly improve quality of life in patients with HF and data from RCTs suggested that Qili Qiangxin is likely safe. This data was drawn from low quality trials and the results of this review must therefore be interpreted with caution. Further research is warranted, ideally involving large, prospective, rigorous trials, in order to confirm these findings.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Risk of bias summary
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4940829&req=5

Fig2: Risk of bias summary

Mentions: Twenty-four trials failed to report all outcomes listed in the methods. The remaining trials reported all outcomes as specified in methods, although only one provided a study protocol. Insufficient information was available for us to conduct a risk of bias assessment in terms of selective reporting. In terms of other biases, only 122 trials reported comparability of baseline data and only one study (Li XL 2013) reported conducting a sample size calculation (Fig. 2).Fig. 2


Clinical effects of a standardized Chinese herbal remedy, Qili Qiangxin, as an adjuvant treatment in heart failure: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sun J, Zhang K, Xiong WJ, Yang GY, Zhang YJ, Wang CC, Lai L, Han M, Ren J, Lewith G, Liu JP - BMC Complement Altern Med (2016)

Risk of bias summary
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4940829&req=5

Fig2: Risk of bias summary
Mentions: Twenty-four trials failed to report all outcomes listed in the methods. The remaining trials reported all outcomes as specified in methods, although only one provided a study protocol. Insufficient information was available for us to conduct a risk of bias assessment in terms of selective reporting. In terms of other biases, only 122 trials reported comparability of baseline data and only one study (Li XL 2013) reported conducting a sample size calculation (Fig. 2).Fig. 2

Bottom Line: However, there is at present no high quality review to evaluate the effects and safety of Qili Qiangxin for patients with HF.However, compared with conventional treatment alone, Qili Qiangxin plus conventional treatment demonstrated a significant reduction in major cardiovascular events (RR 0.46, 95 % CI 0.34 to 0.64) and a significant reduction in re-hospitalization rate due to HF (RR 0.49, 95 % CI 0.38 to 0.64).It appeared to significantly improve quality of life in patients with HF and data from RCTs suggested that Qili Qiangxin is likely safe.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Center for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.

ABSTRACT

Background: Qili Qiangxin capsule is a standardized Chinese herbal treatment that is commonly used in China for heart failure (HF) alongside conventional medical care. In 2014, Chinese guidelines for the treatment of chronic HF highlighted Qili Qiangxin capsules as a potentially effective medicine. However, there is at present no high quality review to evaluate the effects and safety of Qili Qiangxin for patients with HF.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis and followed methods described in our registered protocol [PROSPERO registration: CRD42013006106]. We searched 6 electronic databases to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) irrespective of blinding or placebo control of Qili Qiangxin used as an adjuvant treatment for HF.

Results: We included a total of 129 RCTs published between 2005 and 2015, involving 11,547 patients, aged 18 to 98 years. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference between Qili Qiangxin plus conventional treatment and conventional treatment alone for mortality (RR 0.53, 95 % CI 0.27 to 1.07). However, compared with conventional treatment alone, Qili Qiangxin plus conventional treatment demonstrated a significant reduction in major cardiovascular events (RR 0.46, 95 % CI 0.34 to 0.64) and a significant reduction in re-hospitalization rate due to HF (RR 0.49, 95 % CI 0.38 to 0.64). Qili Qiangxin also showed significant improvement in cardiac function measured by the New York Heart Association scale (RR 1.38, 95 % CI 1.29 to 1.48) and quality of life as measured by Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MD -8.48 scores, 95 % CI -9.56 to -7.39). There were no reports of serious adverse events relating to Qili Qiangxin administration. The majority of included trials were of poor methodological quality.

Conclusions: When compared with conventional treatment alone, Qili Qiangxin combined with conventional treatment demonstrated a significant effect in reducing cardiovascular events and re-hospitalization rate, though not in mortality. It appeared to significantly improve quality of life in patients with HF and data from RCTs suggested that Qili Qiangxin is likely safe. This data was drawn from low quality trials and the results of this review must therefore be interpreted with caution. Further research is warranted, ideally involving large, prospective, rigorous trials, in order to confirm these findings.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus