Traditional Chinese Patent Medicine for Primary Hypertension: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Abstract EN

Background.

Traditional Chinese Patent Medicine (TCPM) is now being used more and more extensively for primary hypertension in China.

However, the comparative efficacy and safety of it need more clarified evidence.

Thus, we conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare TCPMs with other interventions.

Methods.

We searched China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang Data, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to April 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with diagnosis of primary hypertension that compared the efficacy of TCPMs with antihypertension drugs (ADs).

Two researchers screened literature, extracted data, and evaluated risk of bias independently.

The primary outcomes were systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP).

The secondary outcomes were adverse effects (AEs), total cholesterol (TC), and triglyceride (TG).

We used the Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare interventions and described the categorical variable and the continuous variable as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD), respectively.

Besides, we ranked all interventions via the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) values and conducted metaregression with nine covariates as additional analysis.

Results.

We included 192 studies with 23366 patients diagnosed as primary hypertension in total.

For SBP reduction, eighteen interventions were significantly better than AD.

Among them, Yinxingye (YXY) + AD (MD = −12, 95% CrI [−16, −8.5]) was superior to others in the rank plot with SUCRA 0.91.

For DBP reduction, sixteen interventions were significantly better than AD.

Among them, Qinggan Jiangya (QGJY) + AD (MD = −8.7, 95% CrI [−12, −5.5]) and Qiju Dihuang (QJDH) + AD (MD = −8.8, 95% CrI [−12, −5.2]) were superior to others in the rank plot with SUCRA 0.89.

To summarize the SUCRA values, we found that QGJY + AD and YXY + AD had the most significant reductions for both SBP and DBP.

YXY + AD was the best one for both TC (MD = −1.3, 95% CrI [−1.9, −0.64]) and TG (MD = −0.52, 95% CrI [−0.92, −0.11]) reductions.

Considering adverse effects, we found two interventions had significant differences comparing with AD.

Among them, YXY + AD was the best one with SUCRA of 0.01.

Conclusion.

In all TCPMs, QGJY + AD and YXY + AD may be the best options for hypertension.

Meanwhile, YXY + AD can improve blood lipids in patients with hypertension.

However, due to the vague reports of adverse effects and other limitations, more evidence, especially that provided by high-quality studies, is needed to prove the advantages of TCMPs.