The effect and safety of probiotics on depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: With the escalating social pressures, there has been a continuous rise in the prevalence of depression among the population, leading to substantial healthcare burdens. Moreover, conventional pharmacological interventions still exhibit certain limitations. Therefore, the primary objective of this study is to systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy of probiotics in the treatment of depression. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials of probiotics in treating depressive symptoms were retrieved from Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Wan Fang database, and CNKI between the establishment of the database and March 2022. The primary outcome was Beck's depression rating scale (BDI) scores, while the secondary outcomes were depression scores on the DASS-21 scale, biochemical indicators (IL-6, NO, and TNF-α levels), and adverse events. In addition, Revman 5.3 was used for Meta-analysis and quality evaluation, and Stata 17 was used for the Egger test and Begg's test. A total of 776 patients, including 397 and 379 patients in the experimental and control groups, respectively, were included. RESULTS: The total BDI score of the experimental group was lower than that of the control group (MD = - 1.98, 95%CI - 3.14 to - 0.82), and the score of DASS (MD = 0.90, 95%CI - 1.17 to 2.98), the IL-6 level (SMD = - 0.55, 95%CI - 0.88 to - 0.23), the NO level (MD = 5.27, 95% CI 2.51 to 8.03), and the TNF-α level (SMD = 0.19, 95% CI - 0.25 to 0.63). CONCLUSION: The findings substantiate the therapeutic potential of probiotics in mitigating depressive symptoms by significantly reducing Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI) scores and alleviating the overall manifestation of depression.

The effect of Chinese herbal medicine on digestive system and liver functions should not be neglected in COVID-19: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Gastrointestinal symptoms and liver injury are common in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, profiles of different pharmaceutical interventions used are relatively underexplored. Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has been increasingly used for patients with COVID-19, but the efficacy of CHM used in COVID-19 on gastrointestinal symptoms and liver functions has not been well studied with definitive results based on the updated studies. The present study aimed at testing the efficacy of CHM on digestive symptoms and liver function (primary outcomes), the aggravation of COVID-19, and the time to viral assay conversion (secondary outcomes), among patients with COVID-19, compared with standard pharmacotherapy. The literature search was undertaken in 11 electronic databases from December 1, 2019 up to November 8, 2020. Appraisal of the evidence was conducted with Cochrane risk of bias tool or Newcastle Ottawa Scale. A random-effects model or subgroup analysis was conducted when significant heterogeneity was identified in the meta-analysis. The certainty of the evidence was assessed with the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation approach. Forty-eight included trials involving 4,704 participants were included. Meta-analyses favored CHM plus standard pharmacotherapy for COVID-19 on reducing the aggravation of COVID-19 and the time to viral assay conversion compared with standard pharmacotherapy. However, the present CHM as a complementary therapy for treating COVID-19 may not be beneficial for improving most gastrointestinal symptoms and liver function based on the current evidence. More well-conducted trials are warranted to confirm the potential efficacy of CHM furtherly.

Yunnan Baiyao Adjuvant Treatment for Patients with Hemoptysis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Yunnan Baiyao (YNBY) is a traditional Chinese medicine used to treat bleeding. We evaluated the efficacy of YNBY plus conventional pharmaceutical treatment (CPT) versus CPT alone in patients with hemoptysis. METHODS: A total of eight electronic databases were searched. The outcomes in the included studies were effective rate, hemoptysis volume, duration of hemoptysis and hospitalization, number of cases requiring endotracheal intubation, and adverse events (AEs). The studies were used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Risk of bias for included trials was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs were analyzed consisting of a total of 1379 patients. Treatment with YNBY + CPT had a greater effective rate than CPT alone (RR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.23; P < 0.001; I 2 = 0%), a lower hemoptysis volume (MD: -107.37; 95% CI: -121.69 to -93.06; P < 0.001; I 2 = 0%), a shorter duration of hemoptysis (MD: -2.70; 95% CI: -2.96 to 2.43; P < 0.001; I 2 = 0%) and hospitalization (MD: -2.38; 95% CI: -2.93 to -1.83; P < 0.001; I 2 = 9%), and a reduction in the incidence of AEs (RR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.51; P < 0.001; I 2 = 0%). YNBY + CPT treatment provided no significant difference in reducing the number of cases requiring endotracheal intubation compared to CPT alone (RR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.15 to 1.60; P=0.24; I 2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: YNBY plus CPT showed better efficacy than CPT for patients with hemoptysis. Our study provides medical evidence for the efficacy and safety of YNBY for hemoptysis.

Epimedium for Osteoporosis Based on Western and Eastern Medicine: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: The efficacy of conventional pharmacotherapy on osteoporosis was limited and accompanied with serious side effects. Epimedium might have the potential to be developed as agents to treat osteoporosis. The present systematic review and meta-analysis integrating Western medicine and Eastern medicine ("WE" medicine) was to evaluate the efficacy of Epimedium on osteoporosis. Methods: Eleven electronic databases were searched to identify the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Epimedium as an adjunctive or alternative versus conventional pharmacotherapy during osteoporosis. Bone mineral density (BMD), effective rate, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were measured as primary outcomes. The secondary outcomes were pain relief time, bone metabolic markers, and adverse events. Research quality evaluation was conducted according to the modified Jadad scale. Review Manager 5.4 was utilized to perform analyses, and the data were pooled using a random-effect or fixed-effect model to calculate the weighted mean difference (WMD), standardized mean difference (SMD), risk ratio (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Twelve RCTs recruiting 1,017 patients were eligible. Overall, it was possible to verify that, in the Epimedium plus conventional pharmacotherapy group, BMD was significantly improved (p = 0.03), effective rate was significantly improved (p = 0.0001), and VAS was significantly decreased (p = 0.01) over those in control group. When compared to conventional pharmacotherapy, Epimedium used alone improved BMD (p = 0.009) and effective rate (p < 0.0001). VAS was lower (p < 0.00001), and the level of alkaline phosphatase (ALP) was significantly decreased (p = 0.01) in patients taking Epimedium alone compared with those given conventional pharmacotherapy. Results of subgroup analyses yielded that the recommended duration of Epimedium as an adjuvant was >3 months (p = 0.03), the recommended duration of Epimedium as an alternative was ≤3 months (p = 0.002), and Epimedium decoction brought more benefits (SMD = 2.33 [1.92, 2.75]) compared with other dosage forms. No significant publication bias was identified based on statistical tests (t = 0.81, p = 0.440). Conclusions: Epimedium may improve BMD and effective rate and relieve pain as an adjuvant or alternative; Epimedium as an alternative might regulate bone metabolism, especially ALP, with satisfying clinical efficacy during osteoporosis. More rigorous RCTs are warranted to confirm these results.

Oral Chinese Herbal Medicine on Immune Responses During Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cellular immune responses including lymphocyte functions and immune effector cells are critical for the control of coronavirus infection. Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) potentially has a therapeutic effect for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Nevertheless, there are limited clinical practice suggestions on immunogenicity of the CHM against SARS-CoV-2. To assess the effect of oral CHM on immunogenicity and whether oral CHM improves the clinical parameters through the immunity profile during COVID-19, we performed the present study. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, 11 databases were searched for relevant studies assessing oral CHM for COVID-19 on November 20, 2020 (updated March 9, 2021). Primary outcomes mainly included immunity profiles. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality; the remission time of fever, cough, chest tightness, and fatigue. The random effect was used to estimate the heterogeneity of the studies. Summary relative risks, weight mean difference and standardized mean difference were measured with 95% confidence intervals. Modified Jadad scale and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies, respectively. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We analyzed findings from 3,145 patients in 30 eligible studies. Compared with routine treatment, oral CHM, as an adjuvant medicine, improved lymphocyte counts, CD4+, and CD4+/CD8+ ratio with low quality of evidence; improved CD3+ with moderate quality of evidence; and reduced TNF-α with low certainty of evidence. Besides, oral CHM, as an adjuvant medicine reduced the time to clinical symptoms remission with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, compared with routine treatment alone. CONCLUSION: CHM may be recommended as an adjuvant immunotherapy for disease modification and symptom relief in COVID-19 treatment. However, large RCTs objectively assessing the efficacy of CHM on immune responses in COVID-19 are needed to confirm our findings.