中药干预骨髓干细胞治疗心血管疾病疗效和安全性Meta分析

Efficacy and Safety of Chinese Medicine Intervene Bone Marrow Stem Cells in the Treatment of Cardiovascular Diseases:a Meta-analysis

目的:对中药干预骨髓干细胞治疗心血管疾病的疗效和安全性进行系统性评价。方法:从中国知网、万方数据库、维普数据库、Pub Med、Embase及其他中医药相关期刊中检索中药干预骨髓干细胞治疗心血管疾病的临床随机对照试验研究(RCT);提取并汇总纳入研究的原始数据;运用RevMan 5.3软件对数据进行分析,客观评价其疗效。结果:治疗后试验组外周血中CD34^+细胞百分比高于对照组[MD=14.02,95%CI(0.91,27.12)]。中药干预骨髓干细胞治疗心血管疾病的不良反应少,安全性好。结论:中药干预骨髓干细胞治疗心血管疾病的疗效好,且安全性好,值得临床推广。但本研究纳入文献数量较少,总体质量不高,且发表偏倚可能存在,所以仍需更多高质量随机双盲对照临床试验进一步验证。

Ot）jeetive： To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Chinese medicine intervene hone marrow stem cells in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases systematicly. Methods ： The randomized controlled trials （ RCT ） of Chinese medicine intervene bone marrow stern cells in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases were retrieved from China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database （ CNKI ）, Wanfang Data Resource System （ WANFANG DATA ）, VIP network （ VIP ）, PubMed, Einbase and other related journals of traditional Chinese medicine. The raw data in the literatures was extracted and summarized. RevMan 5.3 software was used to analyze the raw data. And the curative eft）et of Chinese medicine intervene bone marrow stem cells in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases was objectively evaluated. Results ： The pereentage of CD34＋ eells in peripheral blood in the experimental group was higher than that in the eontrol group after treatment[MD=14.02,95%IC （ 0.91,27.12 ）]. The adverse effects of Chinese medicine intervene hone marrow stem ceils in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases was less than that of single trimetazidine, so the safety of that was better than thai of single trimetazidine. Conclusion ： The curative effect and security of Chinese medicine intervene bone marrow stem cells in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases is belier than the simple trimetazidine. So that is worthy of clinical promotion. However the results of this study need further validation by more high quality randomized double blind controlled clinical trials, because the number and overall quality of the included literatures in this study is not high, and possible publication bias was included in the literatures.