ABSTRACT
The incidence of idiopathic membranous nephropathy (IMN) is increasing year by year, and the clinical research on Chinese medicine treatment of INM is also growing. This study aims to evaluate the efficiency and safety of Yiqi Huoxue method for IMN. Data sources used were from PubMed, EMbase, the Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, Wanfang and VIP database. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted data. RevMan 5.3 software was used for Meta analysis, and the evidences were graded for the outcomes according to GRADE system by using GRADEprofiler 3.6. Eventually, eleven trials (725 participants) were included in the Meta-analyses. There was statistically significant difference between Yiqi Huoxue method and controls when combining all trials in 24 h UTP [RR=-1.23, 95%CI=(-1.94,-0.53), P=0.000 6] or when combining all trials in ALB [RR=3.56, 95%CI=(1.64, 5.47), P=0.000 3]. Meanwhile, there was statistically significant difference between Yiqi Huoxue method and controls when combining all trials in TC [RR=-0.39, 95%CI=(-0.57, -0.20), P<0.000 1] or when combining all trials in TG [RR=-0.49, 95%CI=(-0.82, -0.15), P=0.004]. However, there was no statistically significant difference between Yiqi Huoxue method and controls when combining all trials in Scr [RR=-3.25, 95%CI=(-9.35, 2.84), P=0.30] or when combining all trials in BUN [RR=-0.81,95%CI=(-2.29, 0.66), P=0.28]. In the statistics, the most frequently used Chinese medicines in clinical application were Astragali Radix, Angelicae Sinensis Radix, Chuanxiong Rhizoma, Codonopsis Radix, Atractylodis Macrocephalae Rhizome and Salvia Miltiorrhiza. The present evidences suggested that Yiqi Huoxue method should be thought highly of in the treatment of IMN, and at the same time, the rational use of traditional Chinese medicine, such as Astragali Radix, Angelicae Sinensis Radix, Chuanxiong Rhizoma also should be paid attention to. However, due to the GRADE evidence grading of the primary outcome measure of 24 h UTP had very low quality, this review can not provide high-quality evidence to prove the clinical efficacy of this method. More well-designed and large-scale multi-center randomized controlled trials should be conducted in the future for verification.