Evidence analysis of clinical research on traditional Chinese medicine treatment of adenomyosis in recent ten years.
10.19540/j.cnki.cjcmm.20250211.501
- Author:
Zhi-Ran LI
1
;
Xiao-Jun BU
2
;
Shan HUANG
3
;
Xing LIAO
4
;
Rui-Hua ZHAO
1
;
Wei-Wei SUN
1
Author Information
1. Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences Beijing 100053, China.
2. Graduate School of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Beijing 100105, China.
3. Qinghai University Xining 810000, China.
4. Institute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences Beijing 100700, China.
- Publication Type:English Abstract
- Keywords:
adenomyosis;
clinical research;
evidence;
methodology;
randomized controlled trial
- MeSH:
Humans;
Adenomyosis/drug therapy*;
Drugs, Chinese Herbal/therapeutic use*;
Female;
Medicine, Chinese Traditional;
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
- From:
China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica
2025;50(10):2853-2864
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
This study aims to systematically review and evaluate the quality of clinical research on the treatment of adenomyosis(AM) with traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) in recent ten years, using evidence graphs. Computer searches were conducted on eight Chinese and English databases, commonly used guideline databases, and guideline-related websites, covering the period from January 1, 2014, to October 1, 2024. Two researchers independently screened, extracted information, and evaluated the quality of the evidence. The distribution and quality of the clinical research evidence were presented using both text and charts. A total of 565 articles were included in the study, comprising 523 intervention studies, 23 observational studies, 18 systematic reviews/Meta-analysis, and 1 guideline. The overall publication volume has shown a downward trend in past two years. The sample sizes of the intervention and observational studies primarily focused on 60 to 120 cases. The intervention schemes mainly involved multi-therapy combinations, including 33 classic prescriptions and 25 Chinese patent medicines. Among these, 48 studies related to 17 classic prescriptions and 45 studies related to 10 types of Chinese patent medicines involved TCM syndrome types. Randomized controlled trial(RCT) tended to focus on overall clinical efficacy and the degree of dysmenorrhea as key outcome measures. Methodological quality issues were found in 97 RCTs related to TCM decoctions and 131 RCTs related to Chinese patent medicines, primarily involving unclear explanations of some information. The AMSTAR scores for the 18 systematic reviews/Meta-analysis ranged from 1 to 8 points, with 16 studies suggesting "evidence of potential therapeutic efficacy". The recommended level for the one included guideline was B-level. TCM shows significant advantages in treating AM. Future clinical research should further standardize study designs, reference relevant reporting guidelines, improve the quality of clinical research, generate higher-level evidence-based results, and promote the high-quality development of clinical research on TCM for treating AM.
