Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Chinese medicine treatment of cholelithiasis.
Methods We searched electronic databases including MEDLINE (1966 to Feb. 2009), EMbase (1974 to Feb. 2009), The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2008), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM, 1978 to Feb. 2009), CJFD (CNKI, 1994 to Feb. 2009), the Chinese Scientific and Technical Journals database (VIP, 1989 to Feb. 2009), and a database of Chinese biomedical journals (CMCC, 1994 to Feb. 2009). At the same time, we searched references of the included studies. Metaanalysis was performed using RevMan 5 if there was no significant heterogeneity. We described the date which could not be combined.
Results A total of 18 randomized controlled trials involving 2 276 patients were included. According to measurement indicators and interventions, subgroup analysis was performed. Efficacy was reported in 10 studies, which showed that part of proprietary Chinese medicines had a higher efficiency for cholelithiasis. Gallbladder emptying index and the trend of bile into the stone were compared in 5 studies, suggesting that the bile of proprietary Chinese medicines reduced the stone index, which eased the bile tendency to rock. Three studies reported the rate of cholecystokinin. Metaanalysis results suggested that the difference was significant. Two studies reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs), such as epigastric discomfort and diarrhea. Most ADRs were slight, and could be self relieved.
Conclusion Results suggest that Chinese medicines produce effects on clinical symptoms of cholelithiasis, gallbladder function and reduce the trend of bile into stones. However, the therapeutic effects for long-term are rarely reported. The conclusion needs further verification due to low methodological quality and apparent heterogeneity.
Citation： CHEN Jun,LIU Yali,SUO Juan,LIU Kainan,WEI Junting,LIU Zhicheng. The Efficacy and Safety of Chinese Medicine on the Cholelithiasis: A Systematic Review. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2010, 10(3): 356-361. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20100409 Copy