鱼腥草滴眼液治疗流行性角结膜炎疗效的Meta分析

Meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials of keratoconjunctivitis managed by Yuxingcao eye drops

目的评价鱼腥草滴眼液治疗流行性角结膜炎的临床疗效。方法检索国内外数据库(中国知网,万方,维普,Pub Med和中国生物医学文献数据库),收集国内外已公开发表的有关鱼腥草滴眼液治疗流行性角结膜炎的临床疗效的随机对照试验,按Meta分析的要求对检索到的文献资料进行质量评估,采用Stata12.0对符合条件的研究进行Meta分析。结果初步筛选出相关文献共106篇,最终筛选并纳入研究的文献共14篇,总样本量879例。与对照组比较,鱼腥草滴眼液治疗流行性角结膜炎患者的总有效率OR合并值为2.49,95%CI(1.28,4.83),痊愈率OR合并值为2.11,95%CI(1.44,3.11),减轻患者异物感、流泪、睑结膜充血和睑结膜滤泡症状评分加权均数差(WMD)依次为:WMD=0.49,95%CI(0.37,0.61),P<0.001;WMD=0.26,95%CI(0.06,0.47),P=0.01;WMD=0.35,95%CI(0.21,0.50),P<0.001;WMD=0.28,95%CI(0.04,0.52),P=0.05。结论鱼腥草滴眼液治疗流行性角结膜炎的临床疗效优于西药对照组,但由于所纳入的研究均为低质量文献且数量有限,因此,仍需更严格设计的、大样本随机双盲对照试验的高质量研究来进一步验证和支持。

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the curative effect of Yuxingcao eye drops on epidemic keratoconjunctivitis by meta-analysis. METHODS All the studies were searched from China National Knowledge Infrastructure,Wanfang database, VIP database, Chinese biomedical literature database and Pub Med and were strictly evaluated through meta-analysis by Stata12.0 to assess the effect of Yuxingcao eye drops on epidemic keratoconjunctivitis.RESULTS A total of 106 related articles were selected by primary screening methods. By further screening, 14 studies including 879 cases were included and analyzed. Compared with the control group, the merged OR value of Yuxingcao eye drops on epidemic keratoconjunctivitis was 2.49, 95%CI（1.28, 4.83）; the merged cure rate was 2.11,95%CI（1.44, 3.11）; weighted mean difference（WMD） and statistical result of attenuation of symptom of foreign body sensation, tearing, palpebral conjunctiva congestion and palpebral conjunctiva follicular between two groups were WMD=0.49,95%CI（0.37,0.61）, P0.00001;WMD=0.26, 95%CI（0.06, 0.47）, P=0.01; WMD=0.35,95%CI（0.21, 0.50）, P〈 0.00001; WMD =0.28,95% CI（0.04, 0.52）, P =0.05 respectively. CONCLUSIONS The result showed that the curative effects of Yuxingcao eye drops were better than that of the western medicine on epidemic keratoconjunctivitis. However, due to the low quality and limited number of literature, the conclusion from our re-search needed further validation from future studies with stricter design, higher quality, larger sample, and scheme of randomization, double-blind, placebo-control.