应用补肺活血胶囊治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病疗效的Meta分析

A Meta-Analysis of Efficacy of Bufei Huoxue Capsule(补肺活血胶囊)in Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

目的系统评价补肺活血胶囊治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病的临床疗效以及安全性。方法检索中国知网(CNKI)、重庆维普中文科技期刊数据库(VIP)、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)和万方数据库中应用补肺活血胶囊治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病的随机对照试验,采用Cochrane handbook推荐的文献质量评价办法进行文献评价,应用Rev Man 5.2软件进行统计学处理。结果符合纳入文献共18篇,共纳入患者1602例,治疗组809例,对照组793例。通过对文献的分析显示,西医常规治疗联合补肺活血胶囊治疗在慢性阻塞性肺疾病的临床总有效率、改善肺功能、改善血氧、6 min步行试验等结局指标优于单纯西医常规治疗,且具有统计学意义(P<0.05或P<0.01)。特别是对肺肾气阴两虚兼有血瘀的患者的治疗,以扶正固本、补肺固肾为主,辅以活血化瘀,具有较好的安全性。结论应用补肺活血胶囊治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病可能有一定的应用价值和可行性,但目前临床研究证据的质量不高,有必要进行设计良好的高质量的随机对照试验进一步验证。

Objective The clinical efficacy and safety of Bufei Huoxue Capsule(补肺活血胶囊) in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were systematically evaluated. Methods Randomized controlled trials of Bufei Huoxue Capsule in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were retrieved from CNKI, VIP, CBM and Wanfang databases. Literature quality evaluation method recommended by Cochrane handbook was adopted for literature evaluation, and Rev Man 5.2 software was used for statistical analysis. Results A total of 18 articles met the study standards, including 1602 patients, 809 in the treatment group and 793 in the control group. Through the analysis of the literature, it was confirmed that the clinical total effective rate, improved lung function, improved blood oxygen, 6-minute walking test and other outcome indexes of conventional western medicine combined with Bufei Huoxue Capsule in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were superior to conventional western medicine, and had statistical significance(P<0.05 or P<0.01). Especially for the treatment of patients with both deficiency of lung, kidney, Qi and Yin combined with blood stasis, it is safe to strengthen the body, lung and kidney, and promote blood circulation and remove blood stasis. Conclusion The application of Bufei Huoxue Capsule in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease may have certain application value and feasibility, but the quality of clinical research evidence is not high. It is necessary to conduct well-designed high-quality randomized controlled trials to further verify.