Systematic Review of Compound Danshen Dropping Pill: A Chinese Patent Medicine for Acute Myocardial Infarction

Table 7

Analyses of secondary outcomes.

Outcomes; (comparisons)	Treatment			Control			Weight; (%)	MD	95% CI
	Mean	SD	𝑁	Mean	SD	𝑁
(4) LVEF%
(4.1) CDDP + conventional therapy versus conventional therapy
Mei et al. 2006 [34]	60.80	7.20	23	59.20	6.80	22	10.50	1.60	[−2.49, 5.69]
Xu and Wang 2007 [21]	51.20	4.30	66	47.10	4.60	80	34.60	4.10	[2.65, 5.55]
Li et al. 2011 [19]	57.10	8.70	252	51.90	9.90	248	31.70	5.20	[3.57, 6.83]
Lin 2011 [33]	54.50	6.80	46	47.80	3.90	44	23.30	6.70	[4.42, 8.98]
Total (REM, 𝐈^𝟐 = 51%)							100.00	4.79	[3.31, 6.28]
Subgroup analysis (according to duration of treatment)
(4.1.1) 30 days–6 weeks
Li et al. 2011 [19]	57.10	8.70	252	51.90	9.90	248	33.90	5.20	[3.57, 6.83]
Lin 2011 [33]	54.50	6.80	46	47.80	3.90	44	17.40	6.70	[4.42, 8.98]
Subtotal (FEM, 𝐈^𝟐 = 9%)							51.30	5.71	[4.38, 7.04]
(4.1.2) 6 months–12 months
Mei et al. 2006 [34]	60.80	7.20	23	59.20	6.80	22	5.40	1.60	[−2.49, 5.69]
Xu and Wang 2007 [21]	51.20	4.30	66	47.10	4.60	80	43.30	4.10	[2.65, 5.55]
Subtotal (FEM, 𝐈^𝟐 = 22%)							48.70	3.82	[2.46, 5.19]
(4.2) CDDP + conventional therapy versus placebo + conventional therapy
Li et al. 2010 [36]	55.69	9.34	42	50.21	7.83	21	100.00	5.48	[1.10, 9.86]
(4.3) CDDP + conventional therapy versus propranolol + conventional therapy
Xu and Wang 2007 [21]	51.20	4.30	66	49.60	5.00	72	100.00	1.60	[0.05, 3.15]
(5) Quality of life (score)
CDDP + conventional therapy versus placebo + conventional therapy
Li et al. 2010 [36]	110.28	19.33	42	97.68	17.13	21	100.00	12.60	[3.23, 21.97]