逍遥散加减治疗玫瑰痤疮临床效果及安全性的Meta分析

Meta-analysis of Clinical Effect and Safety of Xiaoyao Power in Treating Rosacea

目的:系统评价逍遥散加减治疗玫瑰痤疮的临床效果和安全性。方法:以中国知网、万方数据、读秀、中国生物医学文献服务系统、PubMed、Web of Science、Cochrane library和Embase数据库为检索库,使用计算机对建库至2022年4月2日的相关文献进行检索,筛选并纳入所有治疗组应用逍遥散加减方治疗玫瑰痤疮的随机对照试验(RCT)研究。纳入文献由2名研究员进行质量评价,参考方法为Cochrane文献质量评价方法,荟萃分析运用软件为Review Manager 5.3。结果:本研究共收集7篇合格的研究报告,共629例患者,其中治疗组有313例,对照组有316例。治疗组总有效率为95.53%、对照组为76.58%,两组间比较,差异有统计学意义[OR=6.67,95%CI(3.66,12.15),P<0.00001]。治疗组不良反应发生率为3.51%、对照组为6.33%,两组间比较,差异无统计学意义[OR=0.53,95%CI(0.25,1.22),P=0.14]。结论:现有的研究数据分析表明逍遥散加减治疗玫瑰痤疮可提高总有效率,安全性并无明显优势。样本数量较少、文献质量不高为本研究的局限所在,故该结论尚待高质量、大样本、多中心的RCT予以支持。

Objective:To systematically evaluate the clinical effe rosacea.Method:Taking CNKI,wanfang data,Duxiu,SinoMed,PubMed,Web of Science,Cochrane library and Embase as the retrieval databases,the related literatures from the database establishment to April 2,2022 were searched by computer,and were screened and included of treatment groups were treated with modified Xiaoyao Power for rosacea of randomized controlled trial(RCT).The included literatures were evaluated by two researchers.The reference method was Cochrane literature quality evaluation method,and the Meta-analysis software was Review Manager 5.3.Result:Seven qualified research reports were collected in this research,involving 629 patients,including 313 patients in the treatment group and 316 patients in the control group.The total effective rate was 95.53%in the treatment group and 76.58%in the control group,the difference between the two groups was statistically significant[OR=6.67,95%CI(3.66,12.15),P<0.00001].The incidence of adverse reactions was 3.51%in the treatment group and 6.33%in the control group,and there was no significant difference between the two groups[OR=0.53,95%CI(0.25,1.22),P=0.14].Conclusion:The analysis of existing research data shows that modified Xiaoyao Power can improve the total effective rate in the treatment of rosacea,and there is no obvious advantage in safety.The limitation of this research is that the number of samples is small and the quality of literature is not high,so this conclusion needs to be supported by RCT with high quality,large sample and multi-center.