The efficacy of Da Chaihu decoction combined with metformin tablets for type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of Da Chaihu decoction combined with metformin tablets on patients with type 2 diabetes compared with metformin alone. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis is written based on 2020 PRISMA Extension for Chinese Herbal Medicines 2020 (PRISMA-CHM 2020) reporting guidelines. We reviewed all the relevant studies from a search of the following databases from inception to February 2022 without any language restriction: Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Google Scholar, PubMed, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP Information, Wanfang Data, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database(CBM). Data were extracted and the quality was independently evaluated by two reviewers, based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were analyzed using the Cochrane software RevMan 5.3. RESULTS: Six randomized controlled trials comprising 516 participants were included. The meta-analysis revealed the Da Chaihu decoction combined with metformin tablets group was significantly superior to the metformin tablets group in terms of fasting blood glucose(FPG) (-0.66 mmol/L; 95 % CI (confidence intervals) [- 1.28, - 0.04]), plasma glucose 2 h after meal (2-h PG) (-1.18 mmol/L; 95 % CI [-1.94, -0.42]) in six RCTs, body mass index (BMI) (-3.07 mmol/L; 95 % CI [-6.89, 0.75]) in three RCTs, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbAlc) (-0.36 mmol/L; 95 % CI [-1.04, 0.31]) in three RCTs, and triglycerides (TG) (-0.76 mmol/L; 95 % CI [-1.37, -0.15]) in two RCTs. In two RCTs, there were significant differences in terms of total cholesterol (TC) (-0.97 mmol/L; 95 % CI [-1.18, -0.76]). CONCLUSIONS: Very low-quality research shows that Da Chaihu decoction combined with metformin tablets exert a certain level of efficacy on patients with type 2 diabetes compared with metformin alone. However, random sequence generation methodology was reported in five studies leading to the low quality of the included studies. None of the six studies depicted the blinding method, allocation concealment, selective reporting, and assessed the purity and potency of the product. This observation requires verification through high-quality, multi-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trials, and assesses the purity and potency of the product.

Mid- to long-term results of total disc replacement for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) has shown satisfactory clinical outcomes with few complications and reoperations at short-term follow-up, but the mid- to long-term results are not clear. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the mid- to long-term clinical outcomes of artificial TDR for lumbar degenerative disc diseases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using the PubMed database to identify studies of TDR surgery that included at least 3 years of follow-up. The search keywords were as follows: lumbar, total disc replacement, and arthroplasty. The following data were extracted: patient demographics, visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, satisfactory rate, clinical success rate, complications, and reoperations. RESULTS: Thirteen studies, including eight prospective studies and five retrospective studies, met the criteria. A total of 946 patients were identified who reported at least 3 years of follow-up results. The artificial prostheses in these studies were ProDisc-L, Charité, AcroFlex, Maverick, and XL TDR. Patients with lumbar TDR demonstrated significant improvements in VAS scores of 51.1 to 70.5% and of - 15.6 to - 44.4 for Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores at the last follow-up. Patient satisfaction rates were reported in eight studies and ranged from 75.5 to 93.3%. Complication rates were reported in 11 studies, ranging from 0 to 34.4%. The overall reoperation rate was 12.1% (119/986), ranging from 0 to 39.3%, with eight of the 13 studies reporting a reoperation rate of less than 10%. CONCLUSIONS: This review shows that lumbar TDR effectively results in pain relief and an improvement in quality of life at mid- to long-term follow-up. Complication and reoperation rates were acceptable. However, this study did not provide sufficient evidence to show that lumbar TDR is superior to fusion surgery. To answer that question, a greater number of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed.