Skip to main content
ImmuneCited

Safety of Andrographis paniculata: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Wiwan Worakunphanich, Montarat Thavorncharoensap, Sitaporn Youngkong, Kunlawat Thadanipon, Ammarin Thakkinstian
Meta-Analysis Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety 2021 32 citations
PubMed DOI
<\/script>\n
`; }, get iframeSnippet() { const domain = 'immunecited.com'; const params = 'pmid\u003D33372366'; return ``; }, get activeSnippet() { return this.method === 'script' ? this.scriptSnippet : this.iframeSnippet; }, copySnippet() { navigator.clipboard.writeText(this.activeSnippet).then(() => { this.copied = true; setTimeout(() => { this.copied = false; }, 2000); }); } }" @keydown.escape.window="open = false" @click.outside="open = false">

Embed This Widget

Style



      
      
    

Widget powered by . Free, no account required.

Study Design

Study Type
Meta-Analysis
Sample Size
1000
Population
upper respiratory tract infection
Intervention
Safety of Andrographis paniculata: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 95%
Comparator
control
Primary Outcome
None
Effect Direction
Neutral
Risk of Bias
Unclear

Abstract

PURPOSE: Andrographis paniculata is one of the commonly used herbal medicines worldwide. Nevertheless, evidences on adverse events (AEs) associated with Andrographis paniculata are very limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to estimate and to compare the AE incidence of oral monotherapy Andrographis paniculata with others among patients with upper respiratory tract infection, noninfective diarrhea, and autoimmune disease. METHODS: Systematic search was performed through six databases from inception until August 2018. Randomized controlled trial (RCT), cohort, or intensive monitoring of AEs was eligible for review if AE incidence was examined. The incidence of AEs was, then, pooled across studies using meta-analysis. RESULTS: Ten RCTs and 3 intensive monitoring studies were included. Incidence of serious AEs was very rare with the pooled incidence (95% CI) from RCTs of 0.02 per 1000 patients (0.0-0.5). However, the incidence of nonserious AEs was considered very common with the pooled incidence (95% CI) from RCTs of 102.6 per 1000 patients (10.7-256.1), and the pooled incidence (95% CI) from intensive monitoring of 34.2 per 1000 patients (0.0-229.6). The most common nonserious AEs were related to gastrointestinal disorder, and skin and subcutaneous disorder system. CONCLUSIONS: Like other medicine, Andrographis paniculata can cause some AEs. However, it may be generally safe. Nevertheless, prospective patients who plan to use Andrographis paniculata should be thoroughly advised and closely monitored for common AEs. Due to the increasing use of Andrographis paniculata worldwide, larger studies with adequate methodological quality are warranted to monitor the safety of such product.

TL;DR

This systematic review and meta‐analysis was conducted to estimate and to compare the AE incidence of oral monotherapy Andrographis paniculata with others among patients with upper respiratory tract infection, noninfective diarrhea, and autoimmune disease.

Used In Evidence Reviews

Similar Papers