MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Adjunctive Chinese herbal medicine versus acupuncture post-PCI: comparative effectiveness and safety – protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis
Adjunctive Chinese herbal medicine versus acupuncture post-PCI: comparative effectiveness and safety – protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Adjunctive Chinese herbal medicine versus acupuncture post-PCI: comparative effectiveness and safety – protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Adjunctive Chinese herbal medicine versus acupuncture post-PCI: comparative effectiveness and safety – protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis
Adjunctive Chinese herbal medicine versus acupuncture post-PCI: comparative effectiveness and safety – protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Adjunctive Chinese herbal medicine versus acupuncture post-PCI: comparative effectiveness and safety – protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis
Adjunctive Chinese herbal medicine versus acupuncture post-PCI: comparative effectiveness and safety – protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis
Journal Article

Adjunctive Chinese herbal medicine versus acupuncture post-PCI: comparative effectiveness and safety – protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

2025
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
BackgroundCoronary artery disease (CAD) represents a significant global health challenge. Despite advancements like percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), patients remain at risk for recurrent cardiovascular events and persistent symptoms such as angina. Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) and acupuncture are commonly used adjunctive therapies, particularly in East Asia, but robust evidence synthesising their effects when combined with standard post-PCI care is needed. Therefore, this systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding CHM or acupuncture to standard care compared with standard care alone (with or without placebo/sham) in adult patients following PCI.Methods and analysisWe will include parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating CHM or acupuncture plus standard care vs standard care (± placebo/sham) in adults post-PCI for CAD. Major international and Chinese electronic databases and clinical trial registries will be searched from their inception without language restrictions. Two reviewers will independently perform study selection based on predefined eligibility criteria and extract data using a standardised form. Risk of bias for included RCTs will be assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Where appropriate based on clinical and methodological homogeneity (assessed using the I² statistic), pairwise meta-analyses will be conducted using random-effects models. We will calculate risk ratios (RR) or OR for dichotomous outcomes like major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and mortality, and mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) for continuous outcomes such as angina scores and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Furthermore, if the evidence network permits, a network meta-analysis (NMA) will be performed to indirectly compare the relative effectiveness and safety of CHM vs acupuncture. If quantitative synthesis (pairwise or network) is not feasible, a narrative synthesis will be provided. The certainty of the evidence for key outcomes will be assessed using the GRADE approach. This evaluation will encompass the certainty derived from direct pairwise comparisons as well as the indirect comparisons and overall network estimates derived from the NMA.Ethics and disseminationThere are no ethical issues as this study did not conduct any experiments, surveys or human trials. We will ensure that the findings are shared through pertinent channels.PROSPERO registration numberCRD420251040037.