How to cite item

Efficacy and safety of Danggui Buxue Decoction in combination with western medicine treatment of anemia for renal anemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  
@article{ATM13926,
	author = {Ming-Ming Zhao and Yu Zhang and Liu-Sheng Li and Zi-Kai Yu and Bo Li},
	title = {Efficacy and safety of Danggui Buxue Decoction in combination with western medicine treatment of anemia for renal anemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis},
	journal = {Annals of Translational Medicine},
	volume = {5},
	number = {6},
	year = {2017},
	keywords = {},
	abstract = {Background: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Danggui Buxue Decoction for renal anemia when combined with western medicine treatment of anemia. 
Methods: Electronic searching Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang data, Chinese Sci-tech periodical full-text database (VIP). Randomized controlled trials reported results of efficacy and safety of Danggui Buxue Decoction in combination with western medicine treatment of anemia for renal anemia. The “risk of bias assessment tool (Version 5.1.0)” of Cochrane Handbook was applied to assess the quality of included trials and RevMan 5.3 software was used for data analysis. 
Results: A total of 111 studies was retrieved, seven studies including 460 cases were included, the methodological quality of included trials was poor. The result of meta-analysis demonstrated that there was no difference in hemoglobin (Hb) [weighted mean differences (WMD) =−8.75, 95% confidence interval (CI): (−18.64, 1.13), P=0.08], whereas the subgroup analysis showed the difference was significant when the ratio of Radix Astragali to Radix Angelicae Sinensis was 5:1 [WMD =−16.27, 95% CI: (−28.73, −3.80), P=0.01], increase of Hb was more effective in experimental group than control group and the difference was not significant when the ratio of Radix Astragali to Radix Angelicae Sinensis was 5≠1 [WMD =−0.57, 95% CI: (−4.52, 3.39), P=0.78]. There were significant differences in red blood cell (RBC) [WMD =−0.49, 95% CI: (−0.69, −0.28), P},
	issn = {2305-5847},	url = {https://atm.amegroups.org/article/view/13926}
}