Evidence Hub

The Efficacy of Chinese Herbal Medicine in Animal Models of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Jiacheng Zhang, Xiyan Xin, Haolin Zhang, Yutian Zhu, Ye Yang, Dong Li

Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2022

7 citations

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) on ovarian mass, weight, sex hormone disorders, and insulin resistance in animal models of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted through a comprehensive search in three databases to find studies testing CHM in animal models of PCOS. Two researchers independently reviewed the retrieval, extraction, and quality assessment of the dataset. The pooled effects were calculated using random-effect models; heterogeneity was explored through subgroup analysis; and stability was assessed through sensitivity analysis. In addition, publication bias was assessed using the Egger's bias test. Results: Fifteen studies with twelve mice and 463 rats published from 2016 to 2021 met the inclusion criteria. The results of primary outcomes revealed that CHM therapy was significantly different with control animals in ovarian mass and testosterone (SMD, -1.01 (95% CI, -1.58, -1.45); SMD, -1.62 (95% CI, -2.07, -1.16), respectively). The secondary outcomes as well showed an overall positive effect of CHM compared with control animals in weight (SMD, -1.02 (95% CI, -1.39, -0.65)), follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) (SMD, 0.58 (95% CI, 0.19, 0.97)), luteinizing hormone (LH) (SMD, -0.94 [95% CI, -1.25, -0.64)), homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) (SMD, -1.24 (95% CI, -1.57, -0.92)). Subgroup analyses indicated that PCOS induction drug,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free