Jiaqi Ren, Teng Feng, Xize Wu, Qiuying Wu, Yuxi Huang, Yue Li, Kaifeng Yu, Lihong Gong
{"title":"中药缓解心肌桥相关症状的疗效和安全性:一项系统综述和荟萃分析","authors":"Jiaqi Ren, Teng Feng, Xize Wu, Qiuying Wu, Yuxi Huang, Yue Li, Kaifeng Yu, Lihong Gong","doi":"10.3389/fphar.2025.1619617","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>With the advancement of technology, the detection rate of myocardial bridge (MB) has gradually increased and attracted attention. However, management options for symptomatic MB are limited, and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has emerged as a potential complementary approach for managing symptoms in MB patients. This study conducted a meta-analysis by pooling data from clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the efficacy and safety of TCM in alleviating symptoms in patients with MB.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>RCTs of TCM for MB were searched in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CBM, Wanfang, VIP, and CNKI databases from their inception to 1 April 2025. Patients diagnosed with MB <i>via</i> angiography were included in the study. The intervention group received either TCM alone (TCM-alone) or TCM combined with biomedicine (TCM + BM), while the control group received conventional biomedicine alone. Two investigators independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using Stata/MP 18.0 software. A meta-analysis was then conducted using RevMan 5.4.1 software to evaluate outcomes such as angina efficacy, electrocardiogram efficacy, TCM syndrome score efficacy, and the Seattle Angina Scale (SAQ). Subgroup analysis was performed according to the treatment regimen and duration of the intervention group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 18 publications were included, containing 1,224 participants, with 613 in the intervention group and 611 in the control group. Meta-analysis results showed that TCM significantly improved angina efficacy [RR = 1.30, 95% CI (1.21, 1.40), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], reduced angina attack frequency [MD = -0.96 episodes per week, 95% CI (-1.32, -0.59), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], improved electrocardiogram efficacy [RR = 1.31, 95% CI (1.20, 1.42), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], enhanced TCM syndrome scores [RR = 1.45, 95% CI (1.28, 1.64), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], and reduced physical limitation [MD = 5.95, 95% CI (2.25, 9.64), <i>P =</i> 0.002], angina stability [MD = 12.10, 95% CI (7.37, 16.83), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], angina frequency [MD = 11.29, 95% CI (6.93, 15.64), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], treatment satisfaction [MD = 23.44, 95% CI (19.26, 27.61), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], and disease perception [MD = 10.69, 95% CI (5.66, 15.72), <i>P</i> < 0.0001] scores in the SAQ, as well as Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) [MD = -12.83, 95% CI (-13.95, -11.71), <i>P</i> < 0.00001] and Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) [MD = -6.97, 95% CI (-8.41, -5.52), <i>P</i> < 0.00001] scores, and did not increase adverse reactions [RR = 0.82, 95% CI (0.51, 1.34), <i>P</i> = 0.43]. Subgroup analysis results indicated that, compared with the control group, both the TCM-alone [RR = 1.22, 95% CI (1.11, 1.34), <i>P</i> < 0.0001] and TCM + BM [RR = 1.38, 95% CI (1.24, 1.55), <i>P</i> < 0.00001] groups improved angina efficacy; the TCM + BM group improved ECG efficacy [RR = 1.26, 95% CI (1.16, 1.37), <i>P</i> < 0.00001] and TCM syndrome scores [RR = 1.54, 95% CI (1.30, 1.81), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], while the TCM-alone group did not improve ECG efficacy [RR = 1.53, 95% CI (0.92, 2.53), <i>P</i> = 0.10] or TCM syndrome scores [RR = 1.16, 95% CI (0.97, 1.40), <i>P</i> = 0.11]. <i>Salvia miltiorrhiza</i> Bunge [Lamiaceae; <i>Salviae miltiorrhizae radix et rhizoma</i>] and <i>Ligusticum chuanxiong</i> Hort. [Apiaceae; <i>Chuanxiong rhizoma</i>] are high-frequency medicinal substances for MB symptom management.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TCM combined with biomedicine significantly improves angina symptoms, reduces attack frequency, enhances electrocardiographic parameters, alleviates TCM syndrome scores, and improves quality of life in patients with myocardial bridge, with a favorable safety profile. Crucially, TCM monotherapy showed no significant benefits for objective ischemia markers (ECG) or TCM syndrome scores, underscoring its role as a complementary adjunct rather than an alternative to standard care. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of included RCTs, poor quality, small sample size, and single-center studies. Future large-scale, high-quality RCTs are warranted to confirm these results and further evaluate the efficacy and safety of TCM for symptom management in MB.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>identifier CRD420251000868.</p>","PeriodicalId":12491,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Pharmacology","volume":"16 ","pages":"1619617"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12492955/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in alleviating symptoms associated with myocardial bridge: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Jiaqi Ren, Teng Feng, Xize Wu, Qiuying Wu, Yuxi Huang, Yue Li, Kaifeng Yu, Lihong Gong\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fphar.2025.1619617\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>With the advancement of technology, the detection rate of myocardial bridge (MB) has gradually increased and attracted attention. However, management options for symptomatic MB are limited, and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has emerged as a potential complementary approach for managing symptoms in MB patients. This study conducted a meta-analysis by pooling data from clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the efficacy and safety of TCM in alleviating symptoms in patients with MB.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>RCTs of TCM for MB were searched in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CBM, Wanfang, VIP, and CNKI databases from their inception to 1 April 2025. Patients diagnosed with MB <i>via</i> angiography were included in the study. The intervention group received either TCM alone (TCM-alone) or TCM combined with biomedicine (TCM + BM), while the control group received conventional biomedicine alone. Two investigators independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using Stata/MP 18.0 software. A meta-analysis was then conducted using RevMan 5.4.1 software to evaluate outcomes such as angina efficacy, electrocardiogram efficacy, TCM syndrome score efficacy, and the Seattle Angina Scale (SAQ). Subgroup analysis was performed according to the treatment regimen and duration of the intervention group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 18 publications were included, containing 1,224 participants, with 613 in the intervention group and 611 in the control group. Meta-analysis results showed that TCM significantly improved angina efficacy [RR = 1.30, 95% CI (1.21, 1.40), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], reduced angina attack frequency [MD = -0.96 episodes per week, 95% CI (-1.32, -0.59), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], improved electrocardiogram efficacy [RR = 1.31, 95% CI (1.20, 1.42), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], enhanced TCM syndrome scores [RR = 1.45, 95% CI (1.28, 1.64), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], and reduced physical limitation [MD = 5.95, 95% CI (2.25, 9.64), <i>P =</i> 0.002], angina stability [MD = 12.10, 95% CI (7.37, 16.83), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], angina frequency [MD = 11.29, 95% CI (6.93, 15.64), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], treatment satisfaction [MD = 23.44, 95% CI (19.26, 27.61), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], and disease perception [MD = 10.69, 95% CI (5.66, 15.72), <i>P</i> < 0.0001] scores in the SAQ, as well as Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) [MD = -12.83, 95% CI (-13.95, -11.71), <i>P</i> < 0.00001] and Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) [MD = -6.97, 95% CI (-8.41, -5.52), <i>P</i> < 0.00001] scores, and did not increase adverse reactions [RR = 0.82, 95% CI (0.51, 1.34), <i>P</i> = 0.43]. Subgroup analysis results indicated that, compared with the control group, both the TCM-alone [RR = 1.22, 95% CI (1.11, 1.34), <i>P</i> < 0.0001] and TCM + BM [RR = 1.38, 95% CI (1.24, 1.55), <i>P</i> < 0.00001] groups improved angina efficacy; the TCM + BM group improved ECG efficacy [RR = 1.26, 95% CI (1.16, 1.37), <i>P</i> < 0.00001] and TCM syndrome scores [RR = 1.54, 95% CI (1.30, 1.81), <i>P</i> < 0.00001], while the TCM-alone group did not improve ECG efficacy [RR = 1.53, 95% CI (0.92, 2.53), <i>P</i> = 0.10] or TCM syndrome scores [RR = 1.16, 95% CI (0.97, 1.40), <i>P</i> = 0.11]. <i>Salvia miltiorrhiza</i> Bunge [Lamiaceae; <i>Salviae miltiorrhizae radix et rhizoma</i>] and <i>Ligusticum chuanxiong</i> Hort. [Apiaceae; <i>Chuanxiong rhizoma</i>] are high-frequency medicinal substances for MB symptom management.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TCM combined with biomedicine significantly improves angina symptoms, reduces attack frequency, enhances electrocardiographic parameters, alleviates TCM syndrome scores, and improves quality of life in patients with myocardial bridge, with a favorable safety profile. Crucially, TCM monotherapy showed no significant benefits for objective ischemia markers (ECG) or TCM syndrome scores, underscoring its role as a complementary adjunct rather than an alternative to standard care. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of included RCTs, poor quality, small sample size, and single-center studies. Future large-scale, high-quality RCTs are warranted to confirm these results and further evaluate the efficacy and safety of TCM for symptom management in MB.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>identifier CRD420251000868.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12491,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"1619617\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12492955/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2025.1619617\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2025.1619617","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:随着技术的进步,心肌桥(myocardial bridge, MB)的检出率逐渐提高并受到重视。然而,对症状性MB的治疗选择是有限的,中医(TCM)已经成为治疗MB患者症状的潜在补充方法。方法:检索PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane Library、CBM、万方、VIP、中国知网等数据库自成立至2025年4月1日的中药治疗MB的临床随机对照试验(RCTs)数据,对中药治疗MB的疗效和安全性进行meta分析。通过血管造影诊断为MB的患者被纳入研究。干预组采用中药单用(TCM-alone)或中药与生物医学结合(TCM + BM)治疗,对照组采用常规生物医学单用。两名研究者根据纳入和排除标准独立筛选文献。纳入研究的偏倚风险采用Stata/MP 18.0软件进行评估。采用RevMan 5.4.1软件对心绞痛疗效、心电图疗效、中医证候评分疗效、西雅图心绞痛量表(SAQ)进行meta分析。根据干预组治疗方案及持续时间进行亚组分析。结果:共纳入文献18篇,受试者1224人,干预组613人,对照组611人。荟萃分析结果表明,中医显著提高心绞痛疗效(RR = 1.30, 95%可信区间(1.21,1.40),P < 0.00001),心绞痛发作次数减少(MD = -0.96每周发作,95%可信区间(-1.32,-0.59),P < 0.00001),改善心电图疗效(RR = 1.31, 95%可信区间(1.20,1.42),P < 0.00001),提高中医综合症分数(RR = 1.45, 95%可信区间(1.28,1.64),P < 0.00001),并降低物理限制(MD = 5.95, 95% CI (2.25, 9.64), P = 0.002),稳定心绞痛(MD = 12.10,95%可信区间(7.37,16.83),P < 0.00001),心绞痛频率(MD = 11.29, 95% CI (6.93, 15.64), P < 0.00001),治疗满意度(MD = 23.44, 95% CI (19.26, 27.61), P < 0.00001),和疾病认知(MD = 10.69, 95% CI (5.66, 15.72), P < 0.0001] SAQ分数,以及自我评估焦虑量表(SAS) (MD = -12.83, 95% CI (-13.95, -11.71), P < 0.00001)和自我评估抑郁量表(SDS) [MD = -6.97, 95% CI (-8.41, -5.52), P < 0.00001]分数,并没有增加不良反应[RR = 0.82, 95% CI (0.51, 1.34), P = 0.43]。亚组分析结果显示,与对照组相比,中药单用组[RR = 1.22, 95% CI (1.11, 1.34), P < 0.0001]和中药+ BM组[RR = 1.38, 95% CI (1.24, 1.55), P < 0.00001]均改善心绞痛疗效;中药+ BM组改善心电图疗效[RR = 1.26, 95% CI (1.16, 1.37), P < 0.00001]和中医证候评分[RR = 1.54, 95% CI (1.30, 1.81), P < 0.00001],而单用中药组无改善心电图疗效[RR = 1.53, 95% CI (0.92, 2.53), P = 0.10]和中医证候评分[RR = 1.16, 95% CI (0.97, 1.40), P = 0.11]。丹参科;丹参与川芎。[伞形科;川芎是治疗MB症状的高频药材。结论:中药联合生物医学治疗可显著改善心绞痛症状,降低心绞痛发作频率,改善心电参数,减轻中医证候评分,改善心桥患者生活质量,且具有良好的安全性。至关重要的是,中医单一疗法对客观缺血标志物(ECG)或中医综合征评分没有显着益处,强调其作为补充辅助而不是替代标准治疗的作用。然而,由于纳入的随机对照试验数量有限、质量差、样本量小和单中心研究,这些发现应谨慎解释。未来需要大规模、高质量的随机对照试验来证实这些结果,并进一步评价中药治疗mb症状的疗效和安全性。系统评价注册号:CRD420251000868。
Efficacy and safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in alleviating symptoms associated with myocardial bridge: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: With the advancement of technology, the detection rate of myocardial bridge (MB) has gradually increased and attracted attention. However, management options for symptomatic MB are limited, and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has emerged as a potential complementary approach for managing symptoms in MB patients. This study conducted a meta-analysis by pooling data from clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the efficacy and safety of TCM in alleviating symptoms in patients with MB.
Methods: RCTs of TCM for MB were searched in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CBM, Wanfang, VIP, and CNKI databases from their inception to 1 April 2025. Patients diagnosed with MB via angiography were included in the study. The intervention group received either TCM alone (TCM-alone) or TCM combined with biomedicine (TCM + BM), while the control group received conventional biomedicine alone. Two investigators independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using Stata/MP 18.0 software. A meta-analysis was then conducted using RevMan 5.4.1 software to evaluate outcomes such as angina efficacy, electrocardiogram efficacy, TCM syndrome score efficacy, and the Seattle Angina Scale (SAQ). Subgroup analysis was performed according to the treatment regimen and duration of the intervention group.
Results: A total of 18 publications were included, containing 1,224 participants, with 613 in the intervention group and 611 in the control group. Meta-analysis results showed that TCM significantly improved angina efficacy [RR = 1.30, 95% CI (1.21, 1.40), P < 0.00001], reduced angina attack frequency [MD = -0.96 episodes per week, 95% CI (-1.32, -0.59), P < 0.00001], improved electrocardiogram efficacy [RR = 1.31, 95% CI (1.20, 1.42), P < 0.00001], enhanced TCM syndrome scores [RR = 1.45, 95% CI (1.28, 1.64), P < 0.00001], and reduced physical limitation [MD = 5.95, 95% CI (2.25, 9.64), P = 0.002], angina stability [MD = 12.10, 95% CI (7.37, 16.83), P < 0.00001], angina frequency [MD = 11.29, 95% CI (6.93, 15.64), P < 0.00001], treatment satisfaction [MD = 23.44, 95% CI (19.26, 27.61), P < 0.00001], and disease perception [MD = 10.69, 95% CI (5.66, 15.72), P < 0.0001] scores in the SAQ, as well as Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) [MD = -12.83, 95% CI (-13.95, -11.71), P < 0.00001] and Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) [MD = -6.97, 95% CI (-8.41, -5.52), P < 0.00001] scores, and did not increase adverse reactions [RR = 0.82, 95% CI (0.51, 1.34), P = 0.43]. Subgroup analysis results indicated that, compared with the control group, both the TCM-alone [RR = 1.22, 95% CI (1.11, 1.34), P < 0.0001] and TCM + BM [RR = 1.38, 95% CI (1.24, 1.55), P < 0.00001] groups improved angina efficacy; the TCM + BM group improved ECG efficacy [RR = 1.26, 95% CI (1.16, 1.37), P < 0.00001] and TCM syndrome scores [RR = 1.54, 95% CI (1.30, 1.81), P < 0.00001], while the TCM-alone group did not improve ECG efficacy [RR = 1.53, 95% CI (0.92, 2.53), P = 0.10] or TCM syndrome scores [RR = 1.16, 95% CI (0.97, 1.40), P = 0.11]. Salvia miltiorrhiza Bunge [Lamiaceae; Salviae miltiorrhizae radix et rhizoma] and Ligusticum chuanxiong Hort. [Apiaceae; Chuanxiong rhizoma] are high-frequency medicinal substances for MB symptom management.
Conclusion: TCM combined with biomedicine significantly improves angina symptoms, reduces attack frequency, enhances electrocardiographic parameters, alleviates TCM syndrome scores, and improves quality of life in patients with myocardial bridge, with a favorable safety profile. Crucially, TCM monotherapy showed no significant benefits for objective ischemia markers (ECG) or TCM syndrome scores, underscoring its role as a complementary adjunct rather than an alternative to standard care. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of included RCTs, poor quality, small sample size, and single-center studies. Future large-scale, high-quality RCTs are warranted to confirm these results and further evaluate the efficacy and safety of TCM for symptom management in MB.
期刊介绍:
Frontiers in Pharmacology is a leading journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research across disciplines, including basic and clinical pharmacology, medicinal chemistry, pharmacy and toxicology. Field Chief Editor Heike Wulff at UC Davis is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide.