Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Gastroenterology Research and Practice
Volume 2019, Article ID 3480732, 6 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/3480732
Review Article

The Efficacy of Flupentixol-Melitracen in the Adjuvant Therapy of Ulcerative Colitis in the Chinese Population: A Meta-Analysis

1Department of Gastroenterology, The First People’s Hospital of Guiyang, 550000 Guiyang, China
2Centre for Lipid Research & Key Laboratory of Molecular Biology for Infectious Diseases (Ministry of Education), Institute for Viral Hepatitis, Department of Infectious Diseases, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, 400016 Chongqing, China
3The Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases (CCID), Zhejiang University, 310058 Hangzhou, China
4John Moorhead Research Laboratory, Centre for Nephrology, University College London Medical School, Royal Free Campus, University College London, London NW3 2PF, UK

Correspondence should be addressed to Yaxi Chen; nc.ude.umqc@ixaynehc and Xiong Z. Ruan; ku.ca.lcu@naur.x

Received 1 June 2018; Revised 2 December 2018; Accepted 20 December 2018; Published 28 February 2019

Academic Editor: Paolo Gionchetti

Copyright © 2019 Xiaoqian Zhou et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Objectives. Our aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of flupentixol-melitracen in the adjuvant therapy of ulcerative colitis patients in the Chinese population. Methods. Both the RevMan 5.2 and the Stata 12.0 software are used in this study for analysis, and a fixed-effect model (the Mantel-Haenszel method) or a random-effect model (the DerSimonian and Laird method) is used to merge or aggregate the risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence intervals (CI) of included studies. Results. Eleven trials involving 654 ulcerative colitis patients (treated group: 328; control group: 326) were analyzed in this study. Significant differences (, 95% to 1.40, ) between patients were observed between the two groups. Conclusions. Our results suggested that the efficacy of flupentixol-melitracen in the adjuvant therapy of ulcerative colitis is better than traditional drug treatments.

1. Introduction

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic nonspecific inflammatory disease involving the colon and rectum [1, 2], and its pathogenesis may result from changes in the colonic environment and the patients’ psychological state [35]. Because the etiology and pathogenesis of the disease have not been fully elucidated, the recurrence, delayed healing course, and lack of specificity in treatment have brought mental and psychological pressure to patients. Mental and psychological pressure also affects the patient’s immune system, affecting rehabilitation. Therefore, the psychological state of ulcerative colitis patients has been emphasised [6, 7]. If psychosocial factors do contribute to the development of the disease, then the treatment of anxiety and depression may be an effective way to treat UC. Some researchers showed that antianxiety and depression drugs can help alleviate symptoms of UC [8].

Flupentixol-melitracen, a clinically common anxiolytic drug, has been shown to have a better effect in adjuvant therapy for common digestive disorders such as irritable bowel syndrome and functional dyspepsia. Whether the effect of flupentixol-melitracen in the adjuvant therapy of ulcerative colitis patients in the Chinese population is superior to other traditional drug treatments alone is controversial [912], so we conducted a meta-analysis of the data from the current study and we explored and assessed the differences between the effects of flupentixol-melitracen in adjuvant therapy compared to traditional drug treatment, by means of extracted data.

2. Methods

2.1. Data Sources

We use PubMed, Wanfang Data (in Chinese), Springer, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI, in Chinese), Elsevier ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar for searching up to December 2016. The keywords “flupentixol-melitracen,” “adjuvant therapy,” “ulcerative colitis,” “study,” and “trial” were used.

2.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Standards of Studies

(1)Inclusion Criteria. The references included in this study must be published in full text. All the included trials are randomized controlled trials (RCT). Patients included in the study were in line with ulcerative colitis clinical diagnostic criteria (the revised standards of the National Symposium on Chronic Non-infectious Intestinal Diseases of Taiyuan). The trials included a treated group using flupentixol-melitracen combined with traditional drugs (such as mesalazine) and a control group only using traditional drug treatments for ulcerative colitis patients (shown in Table 1). The studies have a standard evaluation criteria(2)Exclusion Criteria. The references excluded in this study are duplicate publications and nonrandomized controlled trials. Subjects were confirmed cases of nonulcerative colitis. The trial did not set up a control group. Subjects had a clear history of mental illness.

Table 1: Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis.
2.3. The Efficacy Standard of Treatments

(1)Cure. Clinical symptoms disappeared. Colonoscopy revealed normal intestinal mucosa(2)Significantly Effective. Clinical symptoms disappeared, and the recurrence of colonoscopy revealed a disappearance of inflammation. The biopsy showed the single diffuse mononuclear cells(3)Effective. Clinical symptoms disappeared. Colonoscopy revealed mild inflammation of the intestinal mucosa or pseudopolypoid(4)Invalid. There was no improvement in clinical symptoms and endoscopic and pathological findings after treatment

2.4. Evaluation of Quality and Meta-Analysis Methods

The evaluation of the quality of each study in this study mainly used the Jadad score. At the same time, meta-analysis was completed in a random or fixed-effect model. For each study, we used risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI) to consolidate and summarize the statistical analysis results. We also used the Mantel-Haenszel method in the fixed-effect model [13] to obtain the combined estimates and used the DerSimonian and Laid methods in the stochastic effect model to calculate OR and its 95% CI of each risk factor [14]. In addition, we tested Cochran’s statistic to further evaluate heterogeneity within the study and between the studies [15]. Moreover, we also used  × (-df)/ to further quantify the substantial effect of heterogeneity within the study and between studies on the meta-analysis [16]. The heterogeneity of the study mainly is reflected by statistics () or statistics (), and then the random-effect model is used for meta-analysis. Otherwise, we used the fixed-effect model. We performed all the statistical analysis using Review Manager 5.2 and the Stata package v.12.0.

2.5. Evaluation of Publication Bias

We measured the asymmetry of the funnel by the natural logarithmic scale of the effect size, and we used Egger linear regression [17] to evaluate the publication bias.

3. Results

3.1. The Screening Process and General Characteristics of the Study

559 references were related to this study (PubMed: 164; Springer: 83; Elsevier ScienceDirect: 61; Google Scholar: 96; Wanfang Data: 68; CNKI: 87). After the selection process by deleting irrelevant/duplicate records as shown in Figure 1, Fifty-one records were primarily involved in this study. Twenty-three of these records were removed by screening the abstracts (10 were not RCT; 13 were review articles). Finally, 28 trials were given a comprehensive review, and 11 trials were analyzed after deleting 17 unsuitable trials (10 only reported flupentixol-melitracen data, and 7 did not provide available data).

Figure 1: Flow diagram for selection of studies. 559 potentially relevant records identified and screened (PubMed: 164; Springer: 83; Elsevier ScienceDirect: 61; Google Scholar: 96; Wanfang Data: 68; CNKI:87); 51 potentially relevant records after duplicates or irrelevant records removed; 23 excluded based on the abstract (13 reviews; 10 not RCT); 28 retrieved for detailed assessment; 17 excluded based on review of the full text (10 only reported flupentixol-melitracen, but not for comparison; 7 due to nonavailable data); 11 separate studies included in meta-analysis.

As is shown in Table 1, there are 11 trials [912, 1824] in this study. The published years of recruited researches were between 2006 and 2015. A total of 654 ulcerative colitis patients (treated group: 328; control group: 326) were included in this study. The sample sizes of this study were between 40 and 80. The eleven trials were randomized controlled trials (RCT). Two had a Jadad score of 3 (Table 2), and nine had a Jadad score of 2.

Table 2: Jadad scoring items of each eligible study for meta-analysis.
3.2. Overall Efficacy of Flupentixol-Melitracen in the Adjuvant Therapy of Ulcerative Colitis

The overall effects of flupentixol-melitracen in the adjuvant therapy of ulcerative colitis patients with this study are revealed in Figure 2. Eleven trials involving 654 ulcerative colitis patients with flupentixol-melitracen in the adjuvant therapy were analyzed in this study. No heterogeneities between studies (, , ) were observed, so we used the fixed-effect model to compare efficacy between the treated group and the control group. Significant differences (, 95% to 1.40, ) in patients were observed between the two groups, suggesting that the efficacy of flupentixol-melitracen in the adjuvant therapy of ulcerative colitis in the treated group may be better than that in the control group.

Figure 2: Forest plot of flupentixol-melitracen in the adjuvant therapy of ulcerative colitis with the experimental group vs. the control group.
3.3. Publication Bias Analysis Assessment

The almost symmetrical funnel plot (Figure 3) and Egger’s linear regression test (, ) of the flupentixol-melitracen efficacy in the adjuvant therapy of ulcerative colitis patients showed that there was no publication bias existing in our study.

Figure 3: Funnel plot of flupentixol-melitracen in the adjuvant therapy of ulcerative colitis with the experimental group vs. the control group.

4. Discussion

Some studies [11, 12, 20, 22, 23] assessed the effects of flupentixol-melitracen in the adjuvant therapy versus other traditional drug treatments for ulcerative colitis patients. But confusing results were found, as the sample sizes of the studies were not large enough and the statistical efficiency of the studies was relatively low. Thus, we combined the eleven trials which included the 654 ulcerative colitis patients (treated group: 328; control group: 326). Significant differences (, 95% to 1.40, ) in patients were observed between the control group and the treated group.

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic nonspecific intestinal inflammation. It mainly affects the mucosa and submucosa of the colon. It spreads from the distal colon to the proximal part of the colon and gradually affects the whole colon [25]. The clinical manifestations usually include abdominal pain, diarrhea, mucus pus, blood, and other symptoms. Symptoms may be persistent or recurrent and may be associated with the skin, mucous membranes, joints, and other parenteral performance. The current treatment of ulcerative colitis often uses 5-aminosalicylic acid drugs, hormones, immunosuppressive agents, and other drugs. Patients are symptomatic for a long period and the symptoms are recurrent. It has a great negative psychological impact on the patient and is often accompanied by depression, anxiety, and other symptoms, which will affect the effect of disease treatment.

Ulcerative colitis is a chronic inflammatory disease and has no special treatment [26]. The current application of anti-inflammatory drugs is mostly aminosalicylic acid, including mesalazine, 5-aminosalicylic acid, and sulfasalazine. The disease is a chronic gastrointestinal disease, which will lead to excessive diarrhea in patients. It can also lead to loss of nutritional ingredients in patients, which will endanger their lives. Therefore, it is essential to take effective treatment combined with the necessary antianxiety drug therapies to improve the patient’s quality of life.

Research has shown that psychological factors alter brain-gut axis function, stimulating the autonomic nervous system; promote the release of various neurotransmitters; increase the activity of immune cells; and alter the interaction between bacteria and mucosa, which work together to damage the intestinal mucosa and lead to the occurrence of ulcerative colitis [27]. Flupentixol-melitracen is a compound preparation containing flupentixol and melitracen. Flupentixol acts on the D2 receptor, promotes the synthesis and release of dopamine, and increases the content of dopamine in synaptic space, which play an antianxiety and antidepression role. Melitracen is a biphasic antidepressant, which can inhibit the uptake of norepinephrine and serotonin through the presynaptic membrane inducing the increase of monoamine transmitters in synaptic space. The mixture of the two ingredients will combat depression and anxiety.

Although the included systematic studies were randomized controlled trials, the Jadad scores of the selected trials were 2 to 3, probably indicating a lower literature quality. Further studies with large-sample, multicenter, and prospective randomized trials are required to confirm the results of the current study.

5. Conclusions

Our results suggested that the efficacy of flupentixol-melitracen in the adjuvant therapy of ulcerative colitis in the experimental group is better than that in traditional drug treatments. The results of this study show that flupentixol-melitracen in the adjuvant therapy is a safe and effective treatment, although a multicenter and large-sample randomized controlled study is still needed to further confirm the results of this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. J. Xu, M. Tam, S. Samaei et al., “Mucoadhesive chitosan hydrogels as rectal drug delivery vessels to treat ulcerative colitis,” Acta Biomaterialia, vol. 48, pp. 247–257, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. T. Watanabe, Y. Ajioka, K. Mitsuyama et al., “Comparison of targeted vs random biopsies for surveillance of ulcerative colitis-associated colorectal cancer,” Gastroenterology, vol. 151, no. 6, pp. 1122–1130, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. N. Rachel, H. Aubrey, S. Noelle, H. Doug, and W. Helané, “P-058 depression and anxiety in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review,” Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, vol. 20, article S51, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  4. P. Hindryckx, V. Jairath, and G. D'Haens, “Acute severe ulcerative colitis: from pathophysiology to clinical management,” Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology, vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 654–664, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. V. Gunterberg, M. Simren, L. Ohman et al., “Autonomic nervous system function predicts the inflammatory response over three years in newly diagnosed ulcerative colitis patients,” Neurogastroenterology & Motility, vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 1655–1662, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. C. W. Sobrado and L. F. Sobrado, “Management of acute severe ulcerative colitis: a clinical update,” Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 201–205, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. C. Mittermaier, C. Dejaco, T. Waldhoer et al., “Impact of depressive mood on relapse in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a prospective 18-month follow-up study,” Psychosomatic Medicine, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 79–84, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. M. Schoultz, “The role of psychological factors in inflammatory bowel disease,” British Journal of Community Nursing, vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 370–374, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. W. H. Huang, “The effect of deanxit combined with mesalazine on treating ulcerative colitis,” Contemporary Medicine, vol. 20, no. 10, p. 118, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  10. Z. G. Li, “Exploration of flupentixol and melitracen combined with mesalazine for treatment of ulcerative colitis,” Nei Mongol Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 51-52, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  11. R. Xie, C. C. Gap, S. N. Wu, W. Yan, and T. H. Ma, “Clinical observation of flupentixol and melitracen combined with mesalazine for treatment of ulcerative colitis patients with anxiety and depression,” Chinese Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 599–602, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  12. R. P. Lin, “To study the clinical evaluation of deanxit combination with mesalazine treatment patients with ulcerative colitis,” Journal of North Pharmacy, vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 18-19, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  13. N. Mantel and W. Haenszel, “Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 719–748, 1959. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. R. DerSimonian and N. Laird, “Meta-analysis in clinical trials,” Controlled Clinical Trials, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 177–188, 1986. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. J. Lau, J. P. Ioannidis, and C. H. Schmid, “Quantitative synthesis in systematic reviews,” Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 127, no. 9, pp. 820–826, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. J. P. Higgins, S. G. Thompson, J. J. Deeks, and D. G. Altman, “Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses,” BMJ, vol. 327, no. 7414, pp. 557–560, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  17. M. Egger, G. D. Smith, M. Schneider, and C. Minder, “Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test,” BMJ, vol. 315, no. 7109, pp. 629–634, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  18. S. F. Duan, “The investigation of the effect of deanxit combined with mesalazine on treating ulcerative colitis,” Chinese and Foreign Medical Research, vol. 12, no. 25, pp. 56-57, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  19. D. F. Fan, “Flupentixol and melitracen combined with mesalazine on treating ulcerative colitis,” Chinese Remedies & Clinics, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 68-69, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  20. X. C. Feng, “Curative effect of furazolidone and methicillin in the treatment of ulcerative colitis,” Shenzhen Journal of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 99-100, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  21. S. C. Hu, “The clinical effect of deanxit combined with mesalazine in the treatment of ulcerative colitis with anxiety and depression,” Healthy Reading Magazines, vol. 8, p. 424, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  22. Y. Hu, “Clinical analysis of 46 cases of ulcerative colitis treated with combination therapy,” Xinjiang Medicine, vol. 41, no. 10, pp. 92–94, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  23. X. H. Li, J. S. Li, and L. F. Chen, “Clinical efficacy of flupentixol and melitracen treatment with ulcerative colitis patients with symptoms of anxiety and depression,” Shanxi Medical Journal, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 246-247, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  24. Z. Y. Yang, “Analysis of the clinical effect of deanxit combined with mesalazine in the treatment of ulcerative colitis,” Modern Diagnosis and Treatment, vol. 24, no. 17, p. 3920, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  25. F. Wang, J. Feng, Q. Gao et al., “Carbohydrate and protein intake and risk of ulcerative colitis: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of epidemiological studies,” Clinical Nutrition, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 1259–1265, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. A. D. Vickers, C. Ainsworth, R. Mody et al., “Systematic review with network meta-analysis: comparative efficacy of biologics in the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis,” PLoS One, vol. 11, no. 10, article e0165435, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. J. E. Mawdsley and D. S. Rampton, “Psychological stress in IBD: new insights into pathogenic and therapeutic implications,” Gut, vol. 54, no. 10, pp. 1481–1491, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus