Herbal Medicines for Treating Metabolic Syndrome: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
Table 3
Summary of findings in this systematic review.
Herbal medicines compared to controls for metabolic syndrome
Patient or population: metabolic syndrome
Setting: outpatient and inpatient
Intervention: herbal medicines
Comparison: no treatment, placebo, and western medicines
Outcomes
Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI)
Relative effect (95% CI)
Number of participants (studies)
Quality of the evidence (grade)
Comments
Risk with control
Risk with intervention
Fasting plasma glucose (FPG)
The mean FPG ranged across control groups from 87 to 260 mg/dL
The mean FPG in the intervention groups was 1.37 mg/dL lower (3.12 lower to 0.39 higher)
—
980 (10 RCTs)
Low
Lower score indicates less risk of diabetes mellitus.
Triglycerides (TG)
The mean TG ranged across control groups from 135 to 291 mg/dL
The mean TG in the intervention groups was 22.54 mg/dL lower (27.81 lower to 17.27 lower)
—
980 (10 RCTs)
Moderate
Lower score indicates less risk of dyslipidemia.
Systolic blood pressure (SBP)
The mean SBP ranged across control groups from 122 to 150 mmHg
The mean SBP in the intervention groups was 6.76 mmHg lower (7.72 lower to 5.81 lower)
—
1080 (11 RCTs)
Moderate
Lower score indicates less risk of hypertension.
Diastolic blood pressure (DBP)
The mean DBP ranged across control groups from 72 to 95 mmHg
The mean DBP in the intervention groups was 5.23 mmHg lower (4.77 lower to 4.68 lower)
—
1080 (11 RCTs)
Moderate
Lower score indicates less risk of hypertension.
Waist circumference (WC)
See comment
—
726 (7 RCTs)
Low
Only 2 studies showed WC separated by sex, so risk could not be calculated.
High density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C)
See comment
—
860 (9 RCTs)
Low
No study showed HDL-C separated by sex, so risk could not be calculated.
The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; MD: mean difference. Heterogeneity and possible publication bias downgraded quality of the evidence. Sparse data downgraded quality of the evidence. Heterogeneity downgraded quality of the evidence.
