| Literature DB >> 29535565 |
Seon Choe1,2, Mudan Cai1, Ui Min Jerng1,3, Jun-Hwan Lee1,2.
Abstract
Cognitive impairment is age-related and manageable only with early diagnosis and prevention. Moxibustion is widely accepted in East Asia as useful for preventing cognitive impairment. This systematic review of animal studies was conducted to verify the efficacy of moxibustion in preventing cognitive impairment and to elucidate the underlying mechanism. Randomized controlled animal trials that established the efficacy of moxibustion in preventing cognitive impairment were included in the analysis. Results of behavioral tests and the signaling pathways elucidated were extracted and a meta-analysis was conducted with the behavioral test results. The risk of bias was evaluated using 9 items, and reporting quality was evaluated using the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments) Guidelines Checklist. Ten trials involving 410 animals met the inclusion criteria. All studies reported the benefit of moxibustion in preventing cognitive deficits caused by Alzheimer's disease (AD). Among five studies using the Morris water maze test, a significant effect of moxibustion in decreasing the escape time was reported in three studies, increasing the crossing times in four studies, and prolonging the dwelling time in two studies. The effects of moxibustion were demonstrated to be mediated by an increase in the activity of neurotrophins and heat shock protein, modulation of the cell cycle, and suppression of apoptosis and inflammation. However, considering the small number of included studies, the lack of studies investigating entire signaling pathways, and a high risk of bias and low reporting quality, our results need to be confirmed through more detailed studies.Entities:
Keywords: Animal experimentation; Cognitive impairment; Moxibustion; Prevention; Systematic review
Year: 2018 PMID: 29535565 PMCID: PMC5840457 DOI: 10.5607/en.2018.27.1.1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Exp Neurobiol ISSN: 1226-2560 Impact factor: 3.261
Assessment of risk of bias in the included studies
| Bias | Item Number | Question | Li [ | Liu [ | Wang [ | Li [ | Du et al. [ | Li et al. [ | Li et al. [ | Liu et al. [ | Liu et al. [ | Du et al. [ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Randomization | 1 | Were animals randomized across groups? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| 2 | What method was used for randomization? | Y | U | U | U | U | Y | Y | U | U | U | |
| Blindness | 3 | Was the outcome assessment blinded? | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U |
| Experimental animals | 4 | Were characteristics of experimental animals clearly described? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Baseline | 5 | Were the groups similar at baseline? | Y | Y | Y | Y | U | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Homogeneity | 6 | Was each treatment homogeneous? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| 7 | Was the method of outcome measurement proper and homogeneous? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | |
| Data completion | 8 | Was the number of animals excluded from analysis and the reason for exclusion clear? | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U |
| 9 | Were the outcome data complete? | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Y, yes; N, no description; U, unclear description.
Fig. 1PRISMA flow diagram for selecting related studies. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed1000097.
Assessment of methodological quality in the included studies
| Study | Animal model | Treatment | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Age (month) | Weight (g) | Sample size | Induced disease | Acupoint | Moxibustion diameter (mm) | Duration (min) | Treatment method and period | |||
| Moxa (M,F) | Control (M,F) | Before inducing model | After inducing model | ||||||||
| Li [ | SD rat | 15 | 350~480 | (100) | (100) | AD | GV20, BL23, ST36 | 8 | 5 | 18 times for 21 days | (After 1 day) 6 times for 7 days |
| Liu [ | SD rat | 12±2 | 360±20 | (100) | (100) | AD | GV20, BL23 | 15~20 | 10 | 40 times for 56 days | (After 4 day) 11 timesfor 11 days |
| Wang [ | SD rat | 12 | 400±50 | (100) | (100) | AD | GV20, BL23 | NR | 10 | 40 times for 56 days | |
| Li [ | SD rat | 12±2 | 360±20 | (55) | (55) | AD | GV20, BL23 | NR | 5 | 40 times for 56 days | |
| Du et al. [ | Wistar rat | 12 | 500±20 | (100) | (100) | AD | GV20, BL23 | 6 | 15 | 48 times for 56 days | 14 times for 14 days |
| Li et al. [ | SD rat | 15 | 350~480 | (100) | (100) | AD | GV20, BL23, ST36 | 8 | 5 | 18 times for 21 days | (After 1 day) 6 times for 7 days |
| Li et al. [ | SD rat | 15 | 350~480 | (100) | (100) | AD | GV20, BL23, ST36 | 8 | 5 | 18 times for 21 days | (After 1 day) 6 times for 7 days |
| Liu et al. [ | SD rat | 12±2 | 360±20 | (55) | (55) | AD | GV20, BL23 | 6 | 10 | 18 times for 21 days | 7 times for 7 days |
| Liu et al. [ | SD rat | 12±2 | 360±20 | (55) | (55) | AD | GV20, BL23 | NA | 5 | 40 times for 56 days | |
| Du et al. [ | SD rat | 10±2 | 360±20 | (55) | (55) | AD | GV20, BL23 | 6 | 10 | 18 times for 21 days | 7 times for 7 days |
SD, Sprague-Dawley; M, male; F, female; Moxa, moxibustion; AD, Alzheimer's disease; NR, not reported; NGF, nerve growth factor; Trk, tropomyosin receptor kinase; BDNF, brain-derived neurotrophic factor; CDK, cyclin-dependent kinase; PGE, prostaglandin E; COX, cyclooxygenase; P-p38 MAPK, phospho-p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase.
Fig. 2Schematic showing the location of acupoints on the rat mentioned in the reviewed studies.
Fig. 3Suspended moxibustion treatment. Moxibustion was performed 2~3 cm above the surface of the acupoints.
Fig. 4Risks of various types of bias.
Reporting quality assessment of the included studies based upon the ‘ARRIVE guideline’
| Study | ARRIVE Guideline | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Introduction | Methods | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Title | Abstract | Background | Objectives | Ethical statement | Study design | Experimental procedure | Experimental animals | Housing/husbandry | Sample size | ||||||||||||
| a | b | a | b | c | a | b | c | d | a | b | a | b | c | a | b | c | |||||
| Li [ | F | P | F | F | F | N | F | P | P | F | P | F | N | F | P | F | F | N | F | N | NA |
| Liu [ | F | P | F | F | F | N | F | P | P | F | P | F | N | F | P | F | F | N | F | N | NA |
| Wang [ | F | F | F | F | F | N | F | P | P | F | P | P | N | P | P | P | F | N | F | N | NA |
| Li [ | F | P | F | F | F | N | F | F | P | F | F | F | N | F | P | F | F | N | F | N | NA |
| Du et al. [ | F | P | F | F | F | F | F | P | P | F | P | P | N | F | P | F | F | N | F | N | NA |
| Li et al. [ | F | P | P | P | F | N | F | F | P | F | F | F | N | F | P | P | P | N | F | N | NA |
| Li et al. [ | F | P | P | P | F | N | F | F | P | F | F | F | N | F | P | P | P | N | F | N | NA |
| Liu et al. [ | F | P | P | P | F | N | F | P | P | F | P | P | N | F | P | P | P | N | F | N | NA |
| Liu et al. [ | F | P | P | N | F | F | F | P | P | F | P | P | N | F | P | P | P | N | F | N | NA |
| Du et al. [ | F | P | P | N | F | N | F | P | P | F | P | P | P | F | P | P | P | N | F | N | NA |
ARRIVE, Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments; F, fully reported; P, partially reported; N, not reported; NA, not applicable.
Fig. 5Forest plot for comparison: moxibustion versus no treatment. Outcome: escape latency in the Morris water maze test.
Fig. 6Forest plot for comparison: moxibustion versus no treatment. Outcome: crossing times in the Morris water maze test.
Fig. 7Forest plot for comparison: moxibustion versus no treatment. Outcome: dwelling times in the Morris water maze test.
Fig. 8Putative mechanisms underlying Alzheimer's disease. The mechanisms identified in the figure represent those that could be modulated by moxibustion, according to the reviewed studies.