| Literature DB >> 31885661 |
Maite Miranda-Garcia1,2,3, Cristina Domingo Gómez4, Cristina Molinet-Coll2, Betina Nishishinya5, Ikram Allaoui2,3, M Dolores Gómez Roig2,3,6, Josefina Goberna-Tricas7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Breech presentation at the time of delivery is 3.8-4%. Fetuses that maintain a noncephalic presentation beyond 32 weeks will have a lower probability of spontaneous version before labor. Given the increasing interest in exploring the use of complementary medicine during pregnancy and childbirth, the moxibustion technique, a type of traditional Chinese medicine, could be another option to try turning a breech baby into a cephalic presentation.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31885661 PMCID: PMC6914967 DOI: 10.1155/2019/7036914
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Flow diagram for selecting systematic review literature on the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture and moxibustion in pregnant women with noncephalic presentation.
Methodological quality of systematic reviews included in moxibustion for pregnant women with a noncephalic presentation.
| Author (year) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coyle 2012 [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Li 2009 [ | Y | Y | Y | NA | Y | Y | Y | NA | N | N | Y |
| Van den Berg 2008 [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y |
| Vas 2009 [ | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N |
| Zang 2013 [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| # Yes (%) | 5 (100) | 5 (100) | 5 (100) | 3 (60) | 5 (100) | 5 (100) | 4 (80) | 4 (80) | 4 (80) | 3 (60) | 4 (80) |
N no; NA, not applicable; NR, not reported; Y yes (systematic review fulfilling the criteria); # of Yes, number of yes; AMSTAR item: 1. Was an “a priori” design provided? 2. Was there duplicate study selection and data extraction? 3. Was a comprehensive literature search performed? 4. Was the status of publication (i.e. grey literature) used as an inclusion criterion? 5. Was a list of studies (included and excluded) provided? 6. Were the characteristics of the included studies provided? 7. Was the scientific quality of the included studies assessed and documented? 8. Was the scientific quality of the included studies used appropriately in formulating conclusions? 9. Were the methods used to combine the findings of studies appropriate? 10. Was the likelihood of publication bias assessed? 11. Was the conflict of interest included? [15].
Characteristics of the studies.
| Study (year) | Included studies | Meta-analysis | Objectives | Sample size |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coyle et al. [ | 8 RCTs | Yes | To examine the safety and efficacy of moxibustion in breech presentation, the need for external cephalic version, mode of birth, and perinatal morbidity and mortality | 1346 |
|
| ||||
| Li et al. [ | 10 RCTs 7 CCTs | Yes | To assess the safety and efficacy of moxibustion and other methods of stimulating acupuncture points to treat breech presentation in pregnant women | 2090 |
|
| ||||
| Van den Berg et al. [ | 6 RCTs 3 CCTs | No | To evaluate the efficacy of the interventions (moxibustion, acupuncture, or electroacupuncture) in acupuncture point V67 for the presentation of breech, in comparison with the expectant behavior | 1624 |
|
| ||||
| Vas et al. [ | 7 RCTs | Yes | To demonstrate the safety and efficacy of moxibustion, compared with a control (expectant management, postural methods, or acupuncture) to correct the noncephalic presentation | 1067 |
|
| ||||
| Zhang et al. [ | 7 RCTs | Yes | To evaluate the safety and efficacy of moxibustion for the correction of noncephalic presentation | 1387 |
Characteristics of studie II.
| Study (year) | Intervention | Control | Results | AMSTAR Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coyle et al. [ | Moxibustion | Moxibustion | Moxibustion produces fewer noncephalic presentations at birth compared with acupuncture (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.72) | 11/11 |
|
| ||||
| Li et al. [ | Moxibustion | No treatment | Meta-analysis showed significant differences between moxibustion and no treatment (RR 1.35, 95% CI 120–155, 3 RCT) | 7/11 |
|
| ||||
| Van den Berg et al. [ | Moxibustion | Does not specify | The pooled RCTs demonstrated a significant effect from the intervention, the proportion of breech presentations in the intervention group was 34% versus 66% in the control group (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.11–0.58) | 9/11 |
| Vaset al. [ | Moxibustion | Observation | Moxibustion (alone or in association with acupuncture or postural measures) with mere observation or postural measurements showed a high degree of heterogeneity and a cephalic version rate in the moxibustion group of 72.5% vs. 53.2% in the control group (RR, 1.36, 95% CI, 1.17–1.58) | 9/11 |
|
| ||||
| Zhang et al. [ | Moxibustion | Knee-chest therapy | The meta-analysis of 4 studies showed encouraging effects in favor of moxibustion in cephalic presentation at delivery (excluding ECV) (RR 1.29, 95% CI, 1.22–1.49) | 11/11 |