[Analysis of clinical research features and outcome indexes of traditional Chinese medicine intervention in septic kidney injury].

ABSTRACT

This study aims to systematically review the clinical features and outcome indicators in randomized controlled trial(RCT) of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) intervention in septic kidney injury and provide a reference for optimizing clinical study design and building the core outcome set(COS) of TCM treatment of septic kidney injury. Computer searches were conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and SinoMed to find published RCT of TCM intervention in septic kidney injury in the past five years, extract the basic characteristics, intervention measures, outcome indicators, and other data of included studies, and conduct descriptive analysis. 53 RCTs were included, and the sample size was mostly concentrated in 60-80 cases, with abdominal infection being the most common(15 articles, 83.3%) and the TCM syndrome of blood stasis being the most frequent(9 articles, 50.0%). The frequency of intervention methods from high to low were TCM decoction(28 articles, 52.8%), Chinese patent medicine(22 articles, 41.5%), and combined TCM therapy(3 articles, 7.5%); the intervention time of the trial was more than 7 d(34 articles, 69.4%). The risk of bias in included studies was unclear. A total of 84 outcome indicators were involved, which were divided into 9 fields, including 63 physical and chemical tests(305 times, 72.2%), 4 kinds of disease degree(48 times, 11.6%), 4 kinds of clinical effective rate(15 times, 3.6%), 1 kind of quality of life(1 time, 0.2%), 2 kinds of economic evaluation(14 times, 3.3%), 1 kind of TCM disease(9 times, 2.1%), 2 kinds of long-term prognosis(16 times, 3.8%), 2 kinds of safety events(6 times, 1.4%), and 5 other indicators(8 times, 0.7%). The cumulative frequency was 422 times, among which the outcome indicators with higher frequency were inflammatory factors(42 articles, 79.2%) and markers of renal function and kidney injury(40 articles, 75.5%). Only 1(1.9%) of the included articles mentioned primary and secondary outcome indicators, and 6 articles(11.3%) mentioned safety events, 13 articles(24.5%) mentioned economic assessment. The RCT quality of TCM intervention in septic renal injury was generally low, and the reference standards for sepsis, kidney injury, and TCM syndrome diagnosis were not uniform. There are some problems in outcome indicators, such as unclear distinction between primary and secondary indicators, neglect of endpoint indicators, lack of application of TCM characteristic indicators, and insufficient attention to safety events and economic assessment. It is suggested that the quality of clinical research methodology should be improved in the future, and the COS should be constructed to provide high-level evidence-based evidence for TCM intervention in septic kidney injury.