论文部分内容阅读
目的 评价雷公藤治疗类风湿关节炎(RA)的疗效和安全性.方法 检索电子资料库包括Cochrane、PUBMED、中国知网、维普和万方数据库,收集比较雷公藤治疗RA的随机对照试验(RCT),对纳入研究的方法学质量进行评价.选择ACR反应标准(ACR20、ACR50、ACR70)和28个关节疾病活动指数评分(DAS28)为主要疗效指标,肿胀关节数、疼痛关节数、晨僵时间、血沉(ESR)、C反应蛋白(CRP)以及总有效率等为次要疗效指标,不良反应发生率为安全性指标,提取数据采用Revman 5.3软件进行统计学分析.结果 检索到符合标准的RCT 6篇,共362例RA患者.Meta分析结果显示:雷公藤组与DMARDs组在主要疗效指标和次要疗效指标的改善、以及不良事件的发生率方面的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 雷公藤在治疗RA的疗效和不良事件的发生方面同临床常用DMARDs药物大致相当.但由于雷公藤治疗RA的RCT质量普遍不高,今后开展大样本、长周期、多中心RCT来研究雷公藤治疗RA将更能客观评价雷公藤的疗效和安全性.“,”Objective A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F (TwHF) in treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods Databases of Cochrane, PUBMED, CNKI, VIP and WanFang were searched, and the methodology quality of randomized control trials (RCTs) about TwHF in treating RA was assessed. ACR20/50/70 and DAS28 were chosen as the primary outcomes. Swollen joint count, tender joint count, ESR, CRP and total effective rate were chosen as the secondary outcomes. The rates of adverse effects were chosen as the safety outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan software 5.3. Results 6 studies were included in present Meta-analysis. The results of this Meta-analysis suggested that there was no significant difference between TwHF group and DMARDs group concerning the primary and secondary outcomes (P>0.05), nor the rates of adverse effects (P>0.05). Conclusion As a treatment for RA, TwHF has the same efficacy and safety as traditional DMARDs. Nevertheless, in virtue of the low quality of existing RCTs, our findings should be confirmed by large prospective studies.