| Literature DB >> 28642714 |
Yanda Li1, Hector Barajas-Martinez2, Bo Li3, Yonghong Gao4, Zhenpeng Zhang1, Hongcai Shang4, Yanwei Xing1, Dan Hu2,5.
Abstract
Introduction andEntities:
Keywords: acupuncture; antiarrhythmic drug; arrhythmias; meta-analysis; randomized controlled trials
Year: 2017 PMID: 28642714 PMCID: PMC5463903 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00358
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
Figure 1Flow diagram of the systematic review.
Summary of the included studies on acupuncture for cardiac arrhythmia.
| Li, | RCT, ST | Referring to a random number table | 1 | 19–65 | AT( | Bed-rest for 30 min( | Response rate (Reduction of HR) | |
| Xie et al., | RCT, ST | Referring to a random number table | 1 | 18–63 | AT( | Bed-rest for 30 min( | Response rate (Reduction of HR) | |
| Dong, | RCT, PSVT | Unclear | 1 | 26–62 | AT( | Drug (Propafenone I.V., | Response rate (Reduction of HR) | |
| Wu and Lin, | Quasi-RCT, PSVT | Referring to clinic record number | 25 | 20–73 | AT( | Drug (Diltiazem P.O., | Response rate (no more recurrent attack and restoration to NSR) | |
| Li and Guo, | PSVT | Unclear | 30 | 35–65 | AT( | Drug (Diltiazem P.O., | Response rate (no more recurrent attack and restoration to NSR) | |
| Xu and Zhang, | RCT, Paroxysmal Af or AF | Referring to a random number table | 1 | 48–69 | AT( | Drug (Amiodarone I.V., | (1) Response rate (restoration to NSR) (2) Average time of restoration to NSR | |
| Lomuscio et al., | RCT, Persistent Af after EC | Unclear | 70 | 59–67 | AT( | Drug (Amiodarone I.V., | Af recurrence rate | |
| Yuan and Ai, | RCT, VPB | Unclear | 30 | 40–65 | AT(Neiguan, Shenmen, Zusanli, Huatuojiaji T4, T5)+Drug(Mexiletine P.O.), ( | Drug(Mexiletine P.O., | (1) Response rate (% reduction of VBP on ECG > 50%) (2) Change of VPB-related symptom score | |
| Zhang and Xu, | RCT, FVPB | Unclear | 14 | 18–72 | AT(Neiguan)+Drug(Mexiletine P.O.) ( | Drug(Mexiletine P.O., | Response rate (symptom reduction and premature beat reduction <5 BPM) | |
| Liu, | RCT, VPB | Unclear | 14 | 17–76 | AT(Neiguan, Shenmen)+Drug(Propafenone P.O.) ( | Drug (Propafenone P.O., | Response rate (symptom reduction and HR reduction <5 BPM) | |
| Zhong, | Quasi-RCT, VPB | Referring to clinic record number | 42 | 17–61 | AT(Neiguan, Shenmen, Xinshu, Juque)+Drug(Propafenone P.O.) ( | Drug (Propafenone P.O., | Response rate (% reduction of VPB on ECG > 50%) | |
| Yuan and Ai, | RCT, FVPB | Unclear | 14 | 38–65 | AT(Neiguan)+Drug(Wenxin granule P.O.) ( | Drug (Wenxin granule P.O., | Response rate (% reduction of VPB on ECG > 50%) | |
| Wang and Zhang, | RCT, PB | Unclear | 12 | 42–70 | AT( | Sham AT ( | Response rate (% reduction of PB on ECG > 50%) | |
AT, acupuncture; RCT, randomized controlled trial; Quasi-RCT, quasi randomized controlled trial; Linggui Bafa, method for picking eight points linked with extraordinary meridians according to time; including acupuncture on Gongsun, Lieque, Shenmai, Zhaohai, Zulinqi, Houxi, Neiguan, and Waiguan, I.V, intravenous injection; PO, per os; NSR, normal sinus rhythm; HR, heart rate; BPM, beat per min; PSVT, paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia; VPB, ventricular premature beat; FVPB, frequent ventricular premature beat; PB, premature beat; Af, atrial fibrillation; AF, atrial flutter; ST, sinus tachycardia; EC, electro-cardioversion; ECG, electrocardiogram.
Figure 2Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of acupuncture treatment compared with existing therapy for several kinds of arrhythmias. (A) Acupuncture vs. conventional drug therapy for PSVT; (B) acupuncture therapy plus the oral administration of AAD vs. the oral administration of AAD alone for VPB; (C) acupuncture vs. control treatment (neither acupuncture nor any other anti-arrhythmic treatment) for ST.
Figure 3The risk of bias. A review of the authors' judgments about each risk of bias items are presented as percentages across all of the included studies. The quality of the selected studies was assessed according to the Cochrane criteria.
Figure 4The risk of bias summary. A review of the authors' judgments about the risk of bias is included in each study.
Figure 5Funnel plot for publication bias [(A) PSVT; (B) VPB].
Egger's test of publication bias for PSVT and VPB.
| PSVT | slope | −0.486075 | 0.6192631 | −0.78 | 0.576 | −8.354558 7.382408 |
| bias | 3.942069 | 4.131573 | 0.95 | 0.515 | −48.55455 56.43869 | |
| VPB | slope | 0.0427075 | 0.2579683 | 0.17 | 0.879 | −0.7782627 0.8636777 |
| bias | 0.9591691 | 2.44781 | 0.39 | 0.721 | −6.830856 8.749194 |
Coef, coefficient; Std. Eff, Standard Effect; Std. Err, Standard Error.