Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36550503›Full record

ArticleChinese medicine2022

Chinese herbal compound prescriptions combined with Chinese medicine powder based on traditional Chinese medicine syndrome differentiation for treatment of chronic atrophic gastritis with erosion: a multi-center, randomized, positive-controlled clinical trial.

Tai Zhang, Beihua Zhang, Jinkang Xu, Shunping Ren, Shaogang Huang, Zhaohong Shi, Shaoju Guo, Liqun Bian, Ping Wang, Fengyun Wang and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chinese medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Tai Zhang *Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Beihua Zhang *Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Jinkang XuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kunshan Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Kunshan, China.
Shunping RenDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Hospital of Shanxi University of Chinese Medicine, Taiyuan, China.
Shaogang HuangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Zhaohong ShiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Wuhan No. 1 Hospital, Wuhan, China.
Shaoju GuoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Shenzhen Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, The Fourth Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Shenzhen, China.
Liqun BianXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Ping WangXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Fengyun WangXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Yidong CaiXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Xudong TangInstitute of Digestive Diseases, Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China. txdly@sina.com.
Xiyuan Hospital · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNGuangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CNShanxi University · CNTraditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Kunshan · CNWuhan No.1 Hospital · CN

Funding

Innovation Team and Talents Cultivation Program of National Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine ZYYCXTD-C-202010Scientific Research Special Fund of Traditional Chinese Medicine Industry 201407001-12
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn this study, Chinese herbal compound prescriptions combined with Chinese medicine powder were evaluated for the treatment of chronic atrophic gastritis with erosion.

methodsThis multi-center, randomized, positive drug control clinical trial randomly assigned 216 patients with chronic atrophic gastritis with erosion to three groups: (1) control group: aluminum plus magnesium suspension thrice per day for 4 weeks; (2) test group 1: Chinese herbal compound prescriptions twice a day plus Sanqi (Panax notoginseng) powder twice a day for 4 weeks; (3) test group 2: Chinese herbal compound prescriptions twice a day plus Sanqi (Panax notoginseng) powder and Zhebeimu (Fritillaria thunbergii Miq.) powder twice a day for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint (improvement of gastric mucosal erosion; improvement of gastric mucosal pathology) and secondary endpoints (improvement of clinical symptoms scores; improvement of the patient-reported outcome [PRO] instrument for chronic gastrointestinal diseases) were assessed using endoscopy at week 4 following the treatment. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were also compared.

resultsThe final analysis included 202 patients (control group, 63; test group 1, 69; test group 2, 70). At week 4, using within-group comparison, gastric mucosal erosion improved in each group following treatment with a significant difference (P < 0.05); there were no statistically significant differences in gastric mucosal erosion scores among the groups after treatment (P > 0.05); in terms of improvement of gastric mucosal erosion, the efficacy rate of the control group was 69.12%, the efficacy rate of the test group 1 was 73.24%, and the efficacy rate of the test group 2 was 69.01% and efficacy rate among the groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). As determined by acute inflammation, chronic inflammation, atrophy, intestinal metaplasia, and dysplasia, the pathological score (total score and the highest score) did not differ statistically among groups following treatment (P > 0.05); within the control group, the total scores of acute inflammation, chronic inflammation, atrophy, and intestinal metaplasia were significantly decreased (P < 0.05), but there was no significant improvement in dysplasia (P > 0.05); in the test group 1, chronic inflammation, atrophy, and intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia scores were significantly decreased (P < 0.05), but acute inflammation did not improve (P > 0.05); there was a significant reduction in the atrophy score in test group 2 (P < 0.05), but no improvement in the scores of acute inflammation, chronic inflammation, intestinal metaplasia, and dysplasia was observed (P > 0.05). Similarly, within the control group, the highest scores of acute inflammation, chronic inflammation, atrophy, and intestinal metaplasia were significantly decreased (P < 0.05), but there was no significant improvement in dysplasia (P > 0.05); there was a significant reduction in highest scores of atrophy, intestinal metaplasia, and dysplasia (P < 0.05) in test group 1, but the highest scores didn't not improve with acute inflammation and chronic inflammation (P > 0.05); there was a significant reduction in the highest atrophy score in test group 2 (P < 0.05), but no improvement in the highest scores of acute inflammation, chronic inflammation, intestinal metaplasia, and dysplasia was observed (P > 0.05). Compared to the control group, the main symptom scores and total symptom scores in the test groups were lower following treatment, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05); the analysis of covariance with center, erosion type, and group as factors was applied, and the comparison among the groups in dyspepsia, defecation, and total PRO instrument scores were statistically significant (P < 0.05). In the study period, AEs were reported in 3 (4.23%) patients in the test group 1 and 3 (4.41%) patients in the control group; ADRs were confirmed in 3 (4.23%) patients from the test group 1 and 2 (2.94%) from the control group. AEs and ADRs were not statistically significantly different among groups (AE, P = 0.2213; ADR, P = 0.2872). No serious AE or ADR was reported.

conclusionsThis study has shown that both aluminum plus magnesium suspension and Chinese herbal compound prescriptions together with Panax notoginseng powder are capable of improving gastric mucosal erosion and reducing gastric mucosal pathological scores, and there were no statistically significant differences among the groups in primary endpoints, indicating that Chinese herbal therapy can achieve similar efficacy than antacids in terms of primary outcomes. The aluminum plus magnesium suspension is comparable to Chinese herbal therapy in improving atrophy and intestinal metaplasia, and is inferior to Chinese herbal therapy in improving dysplasia. In addition, the Chinese herbal therapy significantly outperforms the aluminum plus magnesium suspension in improving symptoms. Therefore, the overall clinical outcome of Chinese herbal compound prescriptions together with Panax notoginseng powder based on TCM syndrome patterns in the treatment of erosive gastritis is superior to that of antacids. Trial registration ChiCTR, ChiCTR-IPR-15005905. Registered 22 January 2015, https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=10359.

Indexed as

Chronic gastritis with erosionEndoscopyMulti-center, randomized studyTraditional Chinese medicine

Identifiers

PMID36550503
PMCPMC9773465
OpenAlexW4312141244

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.