A Comparison of Traditional Chinese Medicine and Multiple Conventional Therapy in Treating Oral Lichen Planus: A Network Meta-analysis.

IF 1.4 4区医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Oral health & preventive dentistry Pub Date : 2024-10-14 DOI:10.3290/j.ohpd.b5779166

Hoilun Chu, Yanting Ip, Guilin Yang

{"title":"A Comparison of Traditional Chinese Medicine and Multiple Conventional Therapy in Treating Oral Lichen Planus: A Network Meta-analysis.","authors":"Hoilun Chu, Yanting Ip, Guilin Yang","doi":"10.3290/j.ohpd.b5779166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of seven conventional treatments and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) combined therapies for oral lichen planus.Materials and methods: This study employs PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Cnki to collect studies. After evaluating the quality and bias risk, RevMan 5.4.1 and R Gemtc package was utilised with a visual analogue scale and side effects as outcomes, to compare the efficacy of the seven treatments.Results: This study included 20 studies, with a sample size of 1669. Our results suggest that photodynamic therapy and TCM demonstrate the most significant decrease in visual analogue scale and the rank is as follows: photodynamic therapy > TCM > TCM combined with non-hormonal immunosuppressive drugs > TCM combined with glucocorticoids > chloroquine combined with glucocorticoids > non-hormonal immunosuppressive drugs > glucocorticoids. Among them, compared to glucocorticoids, photodynamic therapy (-1.55, 95% CI: (-3.09, -0.02)), TCM (-1.25, 95% CI: (-2.46, -0.06)) significantly outperform in statistics. Moreover, no side effects were reported by the photodynamic therapy treatment. In the comparison with non-hormonal immunosuppressive drugs, the result indicates TCM (-4.17, 95% CI (-8.24, -0.34)), glucocorticoids (-2.78, 95% CI (-5.69, -0.17)) and their combination (-2.83, 95% CI (-5.93, -0.05)) have a significantly lower probability of the appearance of side effects.Conclusion: This study indicates that TCM, from the perspectives of efficacy and the likelihood of side effects, outperforms all other common therapies, besides photodynamic therapy, in treating oral lichen planus.","PeriodicalId":19696,"journal":{"name":"Oral health & preventive dentistry","volume":"22 ","pages":"487-494"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11619877/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral health & preventive dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.ohpd.b5779166","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of seven conventional treatments and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) combined therapies for oral lichen planus.

Materials and methods: This study employs PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Cnki to collect studies. After evaluating the quality and bias risk, RevMan 5.4.1 and R Gemtc package was utilised with a visual analogue scale and side effects as outcomes, to compare the efficacy of the seven treatments.

Results: This study included 20 studies, with a sample size of 1669. Our results suggest that photodynamic therapy and TCM demonstrate the most significant decrease in visual analogue scale and the rank is as follows: photodynamic therapy > TCM > TCM combined with non-hormonal immunosuppressive drugs > TCM combined with glucocorticoids > chloroquine combined with glucocorticoids > non-hormonal immunosuppressive drugs > glucocorticoids. Among them, compared to glucocorticoids, photodynamic therapy (-1.55, 95% CI: (-3.09, -0.02)), TCM (-1.25, 95% CI: (-2.46, -0.06)) significantly outperform in statistics. Moreover, no side effects were reported by the photodynamic therapy treatment. In the comparison with non-hormonal immunosuppressive drugs, the result indicates TCM (-4.17, 95% CI (-8.24, -0.34)), glucocorticoids (-2.78, 95% CI (-5.69, -0.17)) and their combination (-2.83, 95% CI (-5.93, -0.05)) have a significantly lower probability of the appearance of side effects.

Conclusion: This study indicates that TCM, from the perspectives of efficacy and the likelihood of side effects, outperforms all other common therapies, besides photodynamic therapy, in treating oral lichen planus.

查看原文本刊更多论文

中药与多种常规疗法治疗口腔扁平苔藓的比较：网络 Meta 分析

目的：评估和比较七种常规疗法和传统中医（TCM）联合疗法对口腔扁平苔藓的疗效：本研究采用PubMed、Web of Science、Cochrane Library和Cnki收集研究。在对研究质量和偏倚风险进行评估后，使用 RevMan 5.4.1 和 R Gemtc 软件包，以视觉模拟量表和副作用为结果，比较七种疗法的疗效：本研究共纳入 20 项研究，样本量为 1669 个。结果表明，光动力疗法和中药在视觉模拟量表中的评分下降最为显著，排名如下：光动力疗法>中药>中药联合非激素类免疫抑制剂>中药联合糖皮质激素>氯喹联合糖皮质激素>非激素类免疫抑制剂>糖皮质激素。其中，与糖皮质激素相比，光动力疗法（-1.55，95% CI：（-3.09，-0.02））、中药（-1.25，95% CI：（-2.46，-0.06））在统计学上明显优于糖皮质激素。此外，光动力疗法治疗未出现副作用。在与非激素类免疫抑制剂的比较中，结果显示中药（-4.17，95% CI（-8.24，-0.34））、糖皮质激素（-2.78，95% CI（-5.69，-0.17））及其联合用药（-2.83，95% CI（-5.93，-0.05））出现副作用的概率明显更低：本研究表明，在治疗口腔扁平苔藓方面，除光动力疗法外，从疗效和出现副作用的可能性角度来看，中药优于所有其他常用疗法。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Oral health & preventive dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Clinicians, general practitioners, teachers, researchers, and public health administrators will find this journal an indispensable source of essential, timely information about scientific progress in the fields of oral health and the prevention of caries, periodontal diseases, oral mucosal diseases, and dental trauma. Central topics, including oral hygiene, oral epidemiology, oral health promotion, and public health issues, are covered in peer-reviewed articles such as clinical and basic science research reports; reviews; invited focus articles, commentaries, and guest editorials; and symposium, workshop, and conference proceedings.