SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2025
The efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine Shugan Sanjie decoction in the treatment of uterine fibroids: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Shugan Sanjie Decoction (SGSJ) is a commonly used Chinese medicine prescription for the treatment of uterine fibroids (UFs). However, there is still a lack of evidence for its effects and safety. To systematically assess the efficacy and safety of SGSJ in conjunction with Mifepristone [MFP] or Leuprolide acetate [LA] for the treatment of UFs, thereby providing a reference for clinical medication. Objective: To systematically assess the efficacy and safety of SGSJ in combination with MFP or LA for the treatment of UFs, thereby providing a basis for clinical medication decisions. Methods: Eight digital medical databases were systematically searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the use of SGSJ combined with MFP or LA for the treatment of UFs. The search spanned from the inception of each database to July 2024. Risk of Bias (ROB) 2.0 and RevMan 5.3 software were utilized for systematic review and meta-analysis. Eligible studies comprised RCTs comparing SGSJ plus MFP or LA with MFP or LA alone. The primary outcome was the Clinical Effective Rate (CER). Secondary outcomes included (1) Uterine Fibroid Volume (UFV) (2), Uterine Volume (UV) (3), Serum Sex Hormone Levels [Follicle-Stimulating Hormone (FSH), Luteinizing Hormone (LH), Estradiol (E2), Progesterone (P)], and (4) Traditional Chinese Medicine Syndrome Scores (TSS). Results: The meta-analysis comprised 12 RCTs with 952 participants. The results of meta-analysis showed that the total effective rate of SGSJ or combined with MFP or LA in the treatment of UFs [RR = 1.26, 95% CI (1.19, 1.34), Conclusion: At present, there are evidence shows that SGSJ combined with MFP or LA improves CER, reduces UFV, and modulates sex hormone levels. However, due to the poor methodological quality and high heterogeneity of the included trials, our conclusions should be interpreted with caution. Future studies should prioritize rigorous RCTs with standardized treatment protocols, extended follow-up, and comprehensive safety assessments to identify SGSJ as a reliable treatment option for UFs. Systematic Review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024506017.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.