ABSTRACT
This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Biling Weitong Granules in the treatment of stomach ache disorder. Randomized controlled trial(RCT) of Biling Weitong Granules in the treatment of digestive diseases with stomach ache disorder as the primary symptom was retrieved from Chinese and English electronic databases and trial registration platforms from database inception to June 10, 2022. Two investigators conducted literature screening and data extraction according to the screening criteria. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool(v 2.0) was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. Analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4 and R 4.2.2, with summary estimates measured using fixed or random effects models. The primary outcome indicators were the visual analogue scale(VAS) scores and stomach ache disorder symptom scores. The secondary outcome indicators were clinical recovery rate, Helicobacter pylori(Hp) eradication rate, and adverse reaction/events. Twenty-seven RCTs were included with a sample size of 2 902 cases. Meta-analysis showed that compared with conventional western medicine treatments or placebo, Biling Weitong Granules could improve VAS scores(SMD=-1.90, 95%CI[-2.18,-1.61], P<0.000 01), stomach ache disorder symptom scores(SMD=-1.26, 95%CI[-1.71,-0.82], P<0.000 01), the clinical recovery rate(RR=1.85, 95%CI[1.66, 2.08], P<0.000 01), and Hp eradication rate(RR=1.28, 95%CI[1.20, 1.37], P<0.000 01). Safety evaluation revealed that the main adverse events in the Biling Weitong Granules included nausea and vomiting, rash, diarrhea, loss of appetite, and bitter mouth, and no serious adverse events were reported. Egger's test showed no statistical significance, indicating no publication bias. The results showed that Biling Weitong Granules in the treatment of digestive system diseases with stomach ache disorder as the primary symptom could improve the VAS scores and stomach ache disorder symptom scores of patients, relieve stomach ache disorder, and improve the clinical recovery rate and Hp eradication rate, with good safety and no serious adverse reactions. However, the quality of the original studies was low with certain limitations. Future studies should use unified and standardized detection methods and evaluation criteria of outcome indicators, pay attention to the rigor of study design and implementation, and highlight the clinical safety of the medicine to provide more reliable clinical evidence support for clinical application.