Search

Background: Psoriasis vulgaris is a chronic skin condition affecting patients' quality of life. Long-term use of conventional therapy increases risk of unwanted side effects. Compound glycyrrhizin in conjunction with conventional therapy has been used in clinical practice, but the evidence for such practice has not been evaluated systematically.Objective: This review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of compound glycyrrhizin in combination with conventional therapy for psoriasis vulgaris.Methods: PubMed, Excerpta Medica dataBASE (Embase), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), CiNii, Chinese Biomedical Literature, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Scientific Journals Full Text Database and Wanfang Data were searched from their respective inceptions to July 2015. Randomized controlled trials comparing compound glycyrrhizin plus conventional therapy to conventional therapy alone for psoriasis vulgaris were included. Data analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3.Results: Eleven randomized controlled trials were included in this review. Meta-analysis of the 11 randomized controlled trials indicated that the addition of compound glycyrrhizin increased the number of patients achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 60 (RR: 1.30 [1.21, 1.40], I2 = 6%), when compared with conventional therapy alone. Comparable numbers of patients experienced adverse events in the two groups.Conclusions: Compound glycyrrhizin in conjunction with conventional therapy enhances clinical response, and compound glycyrrhizin as add-on therapy does not appear to pose any additional risk in the treatment of psoriasis vulgaris. However, the findings should be interpreted with caution of methodological flaws in the included studies. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015027763. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many people with asthma use herbal medicines to help reduce symptoms and improve asthma control.Objective: To update the systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of herbal medicine for adult asthma.Data Sources: Nine English and Chinese databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, AMED, CBM, CNKI, CQVIP, Wanfang).Study Selections: Herbal medicines combined with routine pharmacotherapies compared with the same pharmacotherapies alone or placebo. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and GRADE Summary of Findings tables were used to evaluate methodological quality.Results: Twenty-nine (29) studies involving 3,001 participants were included. Herbal interventions used multi-ingredients such as licorice root, crow-dipper, astragali, and angelica. Compared with routine pharmacotherapies alone, herbal medicines as add-on therapy improved lung function (FEV1: MD 7.81%, 95% CI 5.79, 9.83,I2= 63%; PEFR: MD 65.14 L/min, 95% CI 58.87, 71.41,I2= 21%); asthma control (MD 2.47 points, 95% CI 1.64, 3.29,I2= 55%); reduced salbutamol usage (MD −1.14 puffs/day, 95% CI −2.20, −0.09,I2= 92%); and reduced acute asthma exacerbations over one year (MD −1.20, 95% CI −1.82, −0.58, one study). Compared with placebo plus pharmacotherapies herbal medicines as add-on therapy improved lung function (FEV1: MD 15.83%, 95% CI 13.54, 18.12 and PEFR: MD 55.20 L/min, 95% CI 33.41, 76.99). Other outcomes were not reported in these placebo studies. Included studies were low to moderate quality. Adverse events were rare.Conclusions: Herbal medicines combined with routine pharmacotherapies improved asthma outcomes greater than pharmacotherapies alone. Included studies did not blind participants therefore more studies that address such weaknesses are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]