Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety of Chinese patent medicine for urinary tract infections: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Zhao J, Tang H, Xu R, Chen G

Frontiers in medicine, 2025

3,250 participants

Abstract

Introduction: Chinese patent medicines (CPMs) have garnered increasing attention as therapeutic options for urinary tract infections (UTIs); however, robust evidence supporting their efficacy remains limited. To address this gap, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) incorporating both direct and indirect comparisons to systematically evaluate and rank the efficacy and safety profiles of CPMs for UTIs.

Methods: We systematically searched five electronic databases from their inception through April 2025. Data were analyzed using a frequentist approach with random-effects models.

Results: Twenty-three studies with nine types of medicines and 3,250 patients were included in this study. While network meta-analysis suggested that Xueniaoan capsule with antibiotics (XNA_Ab) had the highest probability of being optimal, this conclusion requires cautious interpretation because of the low certainty of evidence from the included studies.

Conclusion: Several CPMs demonstrate potential therapeutic benefits for UTIs; however, these preliminary findings require validation through rigorously designed large-scale randomized controlled trials.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,250 participants or records.

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