Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Chinese journal of integrative medicine ; (12): 805-810, 2016.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-301018

ABSTRACT

Stenosis of the coronary artery has been considered as an essential component of ischemic heart disease (IHD). Consequently, revascularization [e.g., percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass] has been the primary therapeutic approach to IHD. Such strategy has indeed revolutionized the management of IHD patients. However, not all patients with myocardial ischemia have visible coronary stenosis. Moreover, cardiovascular events occur in nearly 20% patients with stable coronary artery disease who have undergone PCI. The recently proposed "solar system" hypothesis of IHD postulates that coronary stenosis is only one (albeit important) of its features. Mechanistic contribution and clinical implication of multiple pathophysiological processes beyond coronary stenosis are highlighted in this hypothesis. On the basis of a holistic regulation and individualized medicine, Chinese medicine (CM) has been used in the real-world setting to manage a variety of diseases, including IHD, for more than two thousands years. In this article, we summarize the evidence of CM that supports the "solar system" IHD hypothesis, and argue for a comprehensive approach to IHD. At the theoretical level, the central features of this approach include a holistic view of disease and human subjects, as well as individualized medicine. At the practical level, this approach emphasizes anoxia-tolerance and self-healing.


Subject(s)
Humans , Holistic Health , Medicine, Chinese Traditional , Models, Cardiovascular , Myocardial Ischemia , Therapeutics
2.
Chinese journal of integrative medicine ; (12): 56-66, 2016.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-287141

ABSTRACT

<p><b>OBJECTIVES</b>This systemic review evaluated the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicines (CHMs) in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) complicated with depression.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>All databases were retrieved till September 30, 2014. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CHMs with placebo or conventional Western medicine were retrieved. Data extraction, analyses and quality assessment were performed according to the Cochrane standards. RevMan 5.3 was used to synthesize the results.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Thirteen RCTs enrolling 1,095 patients were included. Subgroup analysis was used to assess data. In reducing the degree of depression, CHMs showed no statistic difference in the 4th week [mean difference (MD)=-1.06; 95% confidence interval (CI)-2.38 to 0.26; n=501; I(2)=73%], but it was associated with a statistically significant difference in the 8th week (MD=-1.00; 95% CI-1.64 to-0.36; n=436; I(2)=48%). Meanwhile, the combination therapy (CHMs together with antidepressants) showed significant statistic differences both in the 4th week (MD=-1.99; 95% CI-3.80 to-0.18; n=90) and in the 8th week (MD=-5.61; 95% CI-6.26 to-4.97; n=242; I(2)=87%). In CHD-related clinical evaluation, 3 trials reported the intervention group was superior to the control group. Four trials showed adverse events in the intervention group was less than that in the control group.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>CHMs showed potentially benefits on patients with CHD complicated with depression. Moreover, the effect of CHMs may be similar to or better than antidepressant in certain fields but with less side effects. However, because of small sample size and potential bias of most trials, this result should be interpreted with caution. More rigorous trials with larger sample size and higher quality are warranted to give high quality of evidence to support the use of CHMs for CHD complicated with depression.</p>


Subject(s)
Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Antidepressive Agents , Therapeutic Uses , Case-Control Studies , Coronary Disease , Drug Therapy , Depression , Drug Therapy , Drugs, Chinese Herbal , Therapeutic Uses , Publication Bias , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk
3.
Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine ; (12): 950-956, 2015.
Article in Chinese | WPRIM | ID: wpr-237918

ABSTRACT

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To introduce practical diagnostic criterion of blood stasis syndrome (BSS), and to evaluate its reliability and validity.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>By referring to three diagnostic criteria of BSS [practical diagnostic criterion of BSS (criterion A), diagnostic criterion of BSS in 1986 (criterion B), Consensus of Integrative Medicine on BSS Diagnosis in 2011 (criterion C)], 712 patients from different departments of Xiyuan Hospital were recruited. The reliability of criterion A and its consistency with the other two criteria were assessed using Kappa coefficient. A Bayesian approach was also employed to assess the sensitivity and specificity of criterion A.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>According to the consistency check, criterion A presented good consistency when used by different researchers (the diagnostic accordance rate was 91. 96%, Kappa =0. 82, P <0.001). Meanwhile, there was an acceptable diagnostic consistency among the three diagnostic criteria. Bayesian estimation suggested that criterion A had higher sensitivity but similar specificity, as compared with criterion B or criterion C. Compared with criterion B [the median of sensitivity and specificity were 0. 762 (95% Cl: 0. 731 -0. 790) and 0. 902 (95% Cl: 0. 858 -0. 936) respectively, the median of sensitivity and specificity of criterion A were 0. 911 (95% CI: 0. 888 - 0. 930) and 0. 875 (95% CI: 0. 826 - 0. 915) respectively. Estimating the difference between criterion A and B, the median of sensitivity and specificity were 0. 149 (95% CI: 0. 112 -0.184) and -0. 026 (95% CI:-0. 085 -0. 033) respectively. Compared with criterion C [the median of sensitivity and specificity were 0. 831 (95% Cl: 0. 804 -0. 857) and 0. 892 (95% CI: 0. 848 - 0. 926) respectively], the median of sensitivity and specificity of criterion A were 0. 912 (95% CI: 0. 889 -0. 932) and 0. 880 (95%CI: 0. 833 - 0.919) respectively. Estimating the difference between criterion A and C, the median of sensitivity and specificity were 0. 081 (95% CI: 0.047 - 0.114) and -0.011 (95%CI: -0.070 -0.046) respectively.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Compared with criterion B and C, criterion A not only had better reliability, but also could significantly improve the sensitivity without obviously lowering the specificity.</p>


Subject(s)
Humans , Bayes Theorem , Consensus , Hematologic Diseases , Diagnosis , Medicine, Chinese Traditional , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and Specificity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL