Submit Manuscript

International Journal of Pharmacology

Year: 2013 | Volume: 9 | Issue: 4 | Page No.: 227-244
Facebook Twitter Digg Reddit Linkedin StumbleUpon E-mail

Article Trend

Total views 88

Authors

Roja Rahimi

Shekoufeh Nikfar

Mohammad Abdollahi

Keywords

Review Article

Comparison of the Efficacy and Tolerability of Herbal Medicines with 5-aminosalisylates in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Meta-analysis of Placebo Controlled Clinical Trials Involving 812 Patients

Roja Rahimi, Shekoufeh Nikfar and Mohammad Abdollahi
The use of herbal medicine for the management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is increasing. The aim of the present study is to compare the efficacy and tolerability of herbal medicines with 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs) in IBD by conducting a meta-analysis. For this purpose, electronic databases were searched for studies comparing efficacy and/or tolerability of herbal medicines with 5-ASAs in different types of IBD. The search terms were: “herb” or “plant” or “herbal” and “inflammatory bowel disease”. Data were collected from 1966-2013 (up to Feb). The “clinical response”, “clinical remission”, “endoscopic response”, “endoscopic remission”, “histological response”, “histological remission”, “relapse”, “any adverse events” and “serious adverse events” were the key outcomes of interest. Eight placebo controlled clinical trials met criteria and were included. Comparison of herbal medicine with 5-ASAs yielded the following results: a significant Relative Risk (RR) of 1.28 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.07-1.54, p = 0.008) for clinical remission; a significant RR of 1.19 (95% CI = 1.01-1.39, p = 0.04) for clinical response; a non-significant RR of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.34-2.12, p = 0.73) for endoscopic remission; a non-significant RR of 1.14 (95% CI: 0.99-1.3, p = 0.07) for endoscopic response; a non-significant RR of 0.8 (95% CI: 0.05-13.72) for histological remission; a non-significant RR of 1.32 (95% CI: 0.64-2.9) for histological response; a non-significant RR of 1.05 (95% CI: 0.6-1.83, p = 0.87) for relapse; a non-significant RR of 1.31 (95% CI: 0.8-2.14, p = 0.28) for any adverse events; and a non-significant RR of 1.8 (95% CI: 0.13-24.5, p = 0.66) for serious adverse events. Overall, the efficacy and tolerability of herbal medicines in IBD is comparable to 5-ASAs, but the evidence is too limited to make any confident conclusion. Further high quality, large controlled trials are still needed.
PDF Fulltext XML References Citation

How to cite this article

Roja Rahimi, Shekoufeh Nikfar and Mohammad Abdollahi, 2013. Comparison of the Efficacy and Tolerability of Herbal Medicines with 5-aminosalisylates in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Meta-analysis of Placebo Controlled Clinical Trials Involving 812 Patients. International Journal of Pharmacology, 9: 227-244.

DOI: 10.3923/ijp.2013.227.244

URL: https://scialert.net/abstract/?doi=ijp.2013.227.244

Related Articles

A Comprehensive Review of Antibiotics in Clinical Trials for Inflammatory Bowel Disease
An Evidence-based Review on Medicinal Plants used for the Treatment of Peptic Ulcer in Traditional Iranian Medicine
A Review and Meta-analysis of the Efficacy of Antibiotics and Probiotics in Management of Pouchitis
A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Efficacy and Adverse Events of Infliximab in Comparison to Corticosteroids and Placebo in Active Ulcerative Colitis
Evidence-based Review of Medicinal Plants Used for the Treatment of Hemorrhoids

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *