| Literature DB >> 19793834 |
Florian Beissner1, Christian Henke.
Abstract
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has been used for more than a decade to investigate possible supraspinal mechanisms of acupuncture stimulation. More than 60 studies and several review articles have been published on the topic. However, till now some acupuncture-fMRI studies have not adopted all methodological standards applied to most other fMRI studies. In this critical review, we comment on some of the problems including the choice of baseline, interpretation of deactivations, attention control and implications of different group statistics. We illustrate the possible impact of these problems by focussing on some early findings, namely activations of visual and auditory cortical areas, when acupoints were stimulated that are believed to have a therapeutic effect on vision or hearing in traditional Chinese medicine. While we are far from questioning the validity of using fMRI for the study of acupuncture effects, we think that activations reported by some of these studies were probably not a direct result of acupuncture stimulation but rather attributable to one or more of the methodological problems covered here. Finally, we try to offer solutions for these problems where possible.Entities:
Year: 2011 PMID: 19793834 PMCID: PMC3136715 DOI: 10.1093/ecam/nep154
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Possible explanations other than acupuncture for activations of visual cortical areas found in acupuncture-fMRI studies. Only visual areas have been covered here, although the same reasoning applies to auditory cortical areas.
Methodological and statistical details of acupuncture-fMRI studies reporting activations of visual or auditory cortices under stimulation of respective acupoints.
|
| Block length | Group statistics | Correction method |
| Stimulation method | Activations/ deactivations | (De-)activated Brodman areas | Acupoints used | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vision-related acupoints | |||||||||
| Cho et al. [ | 12 | 50s | None | n/a | n/a | Manual | Both | BA17, 18, 19a | BL60-67 |
| Gareus et al. [ | 8/6 | 60s | Other | n/a |
| Manual | None | None | GB37 |
| Siedentopf et al. [ | 10 | 40s | FFX | Cluster level |
| Laser | Activations | BA18, 19 | BL67 |
| Li et al. [ | 18 | 20s | RFXc | None |
| Manual/ electr. | Both | BA17, 18, 19 | BL60, 65, 66, 67 |
| Litscher et al. [ | 1 | 60s | None | Cluster level |
| Laser | Activations | BA19 | BL67, BL60 |
| Parrish et al. [ | 12 | 300s | FFX | None | n/a | Manual | Activations | BA17, 18, 19a | BL60 |
| Kong et al. [ | 6e | 30s | RFX | None |
| Electrical | Deactivations | BA17, 18, 19 | GB37, BL60 |
| Hearing-related acupoints | |||||||||
| Parrish et al. [ | 12 | 300s | FFX | None | n/a | Manual | Activations | BA22, 41, 42a | KID3 |
| Wesolowski et al. [ | 20 | 30s | RFX | None |
| Manual | None | None | GB43 |
aDerived from figures (not reported in article); bStudies with negative results; cOnly subjects with activations on first level were included in second-level analysis; dStudy covers both visual and auditory points; eEach subject was measured six times resulting in an effective n = 20 (according to the authors).