SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Efficacy and safety of combining commercial Chinese polyherbal preparation with conventional medicine in the treatment of coronary microvascular disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically assess and compare the efficacy and safety of 19 commercial Chinese polyherbal preparation for coronary microvascular disease (CMVD) through a frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials. Methods: A comprehensive search was performed across multiple databases through November 2025 to identify studies evaluating the effectiveness of CCPPs in treating CMVD. Two independent reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. The NMA was conducted using a frequentist random-effects model, and statistical analyses were performed in Stata 18.0. Network diagrams, league tables, and SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking curve) plots were generated to compare and rank the treatments. Results: Sixty-seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 6,139 patients were included. All CCPPs combined with conventional medicine (CM) demonstrated potential advantages in efficacy compared to CM alone, but the optimal agent is highly outcome-specific. Yixinshu Tablets may be more favorable for improving microvascular function by reducing the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) and increasing coronary flow reserve (CFR). Tongxinluo Capsule showed a relatively greater reduction in corrected thrombolysis in myocardial infarction frame count (cTFC) and a higher total effective rate in the included studies. Shexiang Tongxin Dripping Pills was associated with a more pronounced elevation in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Danshen Dripping Pills ranked highest for reducing endothelin-1 (ET-1) and increasing nitric oxide (NO) levels. Yindan Xinnao Tong Capsules exhibited a relatively greater decrease in high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP). Additionally, Shexiang Baoxin Pills was associated with the lowest risk of adverse events. Conclusion: The combination of CCPPs with CM for CMVD may be associated with improved clinical outcomes compared to CM alone. However, these initial results require confirmation through high-quality, rigorously designed clinical trials. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251245224, identifier CRD420251245224.
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.