Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Herbal Medicines for the Treatment of Active Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
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.
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?
Herbal Medicines for the Treatment of Active Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Herbal Medicines for the Treatment of Active Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and 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
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.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Herbal Medicines for the Treatment of Active Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
2024
Overview
Herbal medicines are used by patients with IBD despite limited evidence. We present a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating treatment with herbal medicines in active ulcerative colitis (UC). A search query designed by a library informationist was used to identify potential articles for inclusion. Articles were screened and data were extracted by at least two investigators. Outcomes of interest included clinical response, clinical remission, endoscopic response, endoscopic remission, and safety. We identified 28 RCTs for 18 herbs. In pooled analyses, when compared with placebo, clinical response rates were significantly higher for Indigo naturalis (IN) (RR 3.70, 95% CI 1.97–6.95), but not for Curcuma longa (CL) (RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.99–2.58) or Andrographis paniculata (AP) (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.71–1.26). There was a significantly higher rate of clinical remission for CL (RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.18–5.63), but not for AP (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.86–2.01). Higher rates of endoscopic response (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.08–2.26) and remission (RR 19.37, 95% CI 2.71–138.42) were significant for CL. CL has evidence supporting its use as an adjuvant therapy in active UC. Research with larger scale and well-designed RCTs, manufacturing regulations, and education are needed.
Publisher
MDPI AG
