Herbal Medicines for Acute Kidney Injury: Evidence, Gaps and Frontiers

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a major health threat worldwide. The literature on herbal intervention in AKI was searched from English and Chinese databases and reports were critically analyzed in terms of preventing AKI, promoting repair and regeneration, enhancing extrarenal clearance of uremic toxins, and preventing progression to chronic kidney disease (CKD). Altogether, 16 herbal formulae and a few extracts derived from individual herbs were reported to prevent or mitigate AKI in animal models induced by renal ischemia/reperfusion, cisplastin, gentamicin, glycerol, adenine, sepsis or physical exhaustion. Four formulae and six individual herbs were reported to accelerate recovery and/or to prevent CKD in established AKI animal models. Intrarectal herbal medicines, with or without simultaneous oral administration, were reported in six clinical trials and in an animal model to increase extrarenal clearance of uremic toxins. Additional 13 clinical trials reported oral or intravenous herbal interventions in AKI of different etiologies. Despite recurring problems, notably poor compliance with good practice guidelines for clinical trials and for authentication, naming and quality control of herbal materials, accumulating experimental data on the preventive effects of herbal medicines in AKI look encouraging and urge for better, definitive trials to guide clinical practice. Herbal enemas promoting extrarenal clearance of uremic toxins seem cost-effective, but better clinical evidence is certainly needed before any affirmative recommendation be made for AKI patients without access to dialysis. New frontiers, however, lie in those herbal remedies that promote repair/regeneration and prevent chronicity after AKI. Recent experimental data suggest that this may be possible

An international validation of the AO spine subaxial injury classification system

Purpose To validate the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System with participants of various experience levels, subspecialties, and geographic regions. Methods A live webinar was organized in 2020 for validation of the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System. The validation consisted of 41 unique subaxial cervical spine injuries with associated computed tomography scans and key images. Intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability of the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System were calculated for injury morphology, injury subtype, and facet injury. The reliability and reproducibility of the classification system were categorized as slight (? = 0-0.20), fair (? = 0.21-0.40), moderate (? = 0.41-0.60), substantial (? = 0.61-0.80), or excellent (? = > 0.80) as determined by the Landis and Koch classification. Results A total of 203 AO Spine members participated in the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System validation. The percent of participants accurately classifying each injury was over 90% for fracture morphology and fracture subtype on both assessments. The interobserver reliability for fracture morphology was excellent (? = 0.87), while fracture subtype (? = 0.80) and facet injury were substantial (? = 0.74). The intraobserver reproducibility for fracture morphology and subtype were excellent (? = 0.85, 0.88, respectively), while reproducibility for facet injuries was substantial (? = 0.76). Conclusion The AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System demonstrated excellent interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility for fracture morphology, substantial reliability and reproducibility for facet injuries, and excellent reproducibility with substantial reliability for injury subtype