Integrated Chinese herbal medicine with Western Medicine versus Western Medicine in the effectiveness of primary hypertension treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Shadi A D Mohammed,Liu Hanxing,Lu Fang,Adnan Mohammed Algradi,Mohammed Alradhi,Mohammed Safi,Liu Shumin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2022.115703
2023-01-10
Abstract:Ethnopharmacological relevance: Integrated Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) and Western Medicine (WM) treatments have been used for primary hypertension (PHTN) patients in China. Currently, there are many randomized control trials (RCTs) published regarding the effect of CHM and WM on PHTN, which indicated that combining Chinese with WM was effective and safe for PHTN when compared with WM alone, but the quality of evidence was insufficient, and there is no clear information and summary are available for these RCTs assessing the effectiveness of CHM with WM versus WM in patients with PHTN. Objectives: This systematic study and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of CHM combined with WM in comparison with WM in reducing systolic and diastolic blood pressure for patients with PHTN. Methods: The information of this study was searched from electronic databases (PubMed, COCHRANE, EMBASE, Ovid, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, and CBM). The markedly effective and effective terms were according to Guiding Principles for Clinical Research of New Chinese Medicines. Two investigators independently reviewed each trial. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used for quality assessment, and RevMan 5.4 was used for meta-analysis. Results: In this study, a total of 29 studies that included 2623 patients were recorded. The study results displayed that the clinical effectiveness in the treatment of hypertension patients from the integrated medicines was considerably higher than that with WM alone, clinical effective (RR 1.23, 95% CI [1.17, 1.30], P < 0.00001), and markedly effective (ME) in the patients (RR 1.66, 95% CI [1.52, 1.80], and P < 0.00001). Random effect in SBP (MD 7.91 mmHg,[6.00, 983], P < 0.00001) and DBP (MD 5.46 mmHg, [3.88, 6.43], P < 0.00001), a subgroup analysis was carried out based on the type of intervention, duration of treatment, and CHM formulas that showed significance. Furthermore, no severe side effects were reported, and no patients stopped treatment or withdrawal due to any severe adverse events. Conclusion: Compared to WM alone, the therapeutic effectiveness of CHM combined with WM is significantly improved in the treatment of hypertension. Additionally, CHM with WM may safely and efficiently lower systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in individuals with PHTN. However, rigorous randomized controlled trials with a large sample, high quality, long duration of treatment, and follow-up are recommended to strengthen this clinical evidence.