Systematic review and Meta-analysis of clinical efficacy and safety of Ginkgo Leaf Tablets in treatment of acute cerebral infarction.
10.19540/j.cnki.cjcmm.20200903.501
- Author:
Tian-Tian MENG
1
;
Zi-Yu TIAN
1
;
Xiao-Long XIE
1
;
Ting-Ting LI
1
;
Wei-di LIU
1
;
Ying GAO
1
Author Information
1. Dongzhimen Hospital,Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Beijing 100700,China Institute for Brain Disorders,Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Beijing 100700,China.
- Publication Type:Systematic Review
- Keywords:
Ginkgo Leaf Tablets;
Meta-analysis;
acute cerebral infarction;
efficacy;
safety;
systematic review
- MeSH:
Cerebral Infarction/drug therapy*;
Ginkgo biloba;
Humans;
Plant Leaves;
Tablets;
Treatment Outcome
- From:
China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica
2021;46(6):1537-1546
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of Ginkgo Leaf Tablets(GLT) in the treatment of acute cerebral infarction(ACI). Seven databases both at home and abroad were systematically retrieved from their establishment to March 2020. The data of the included studies were extracted after review and screening. The quality of the included studies was assessed with the Cochrane risk bias assessment tool, and then the included studies were put into Meta-analysis by RevMan 5.3 to evaluate the total cli-nical efficiency, neurological function score, blood lipids and incidence of adverse reactions in treatment of ACI by GLT. Finally, the GRADE system was adopted to evaluate the evidence quality of each outcome indicator and form recommendations. Ten studies involving 886 participants were included, all of which were of low quality. Meta-analysis results showed that,(1)in terms of the total clinical efficiency, GLT+Western medicine was superior to Western medicine alone(RR_(NDS)=1.20, 95%CI[1.06, 1.36], P=0.005; RR_(NIHSS)=1.35, 95%CI[1.09, 1.69], P=0.007), and there was no statistical difference between GLT+Xuesaitong Injection+Wes-tern medicine and Xuesaitong Injection+Western medicine(RR=1.16, 95%CI[1.00, 1.35], P=0.05).(2)In terms of improving neurological function score, GLT+Western medicine was superior to Western medicine alone(MD_(NIHSS[moderate(severe)])=-1.55, 95%CI[-2.22,-0.88], P<0.000 01; MD_(NIHSS(severe))=-7.51, 95%CI[-8.00,-7.02], P<0.000 01; MD_(NDS)=-1.36, 95%CI[-2.39,-0.33], P=0.01), and GLT+Danshen Injection+Western medicine was superior to Danshen Injection+Western medicine(MD_(NDS)=-3.09, 95%CI[-3.84,-2.34], P<0.000 01).(3)In terms of regulating blood lipids, GLT+Western medicine was superior to Wes-tern medicine alone(MD_(TC)=-1.40, 95%CI[-2.13,-0.66], P=0.000 2; MD_(TG)=-1.29, 95%CI[-1.86,-0.73], P<0.000 01; MD_(LDL-C)=-1.48, 95%CI[-2.91,-0.04], P=0.04; MD_(HDL-C)=0.07, 95%CI[0.02, 0.12], P=0.009).(4)In terms of incidence of adverse reactions, there was no statistical difference between GLT+Western medicine and Western medicine alone(RR=0.63, 95%CI[0.30, 1.32], P=0.22). The results of the evaluation showed that the evidence level of each outcome indicator was low, and the recommendation was at weak level. In conclusion, GLT+Western medicine could improve the total clinical efficiency, neurological function score, and blood lipid status, with a low incidence of adverse reactions. However, due to the small amount of included stu-dies, low study quality and low level of evidence, it is expected to carry out clinical studies with standardized design and large sample size in the future to further investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of GLT in the treatment of ACI.
