| Literature DB >> 32476804 |
Yu Guo1, Wei Wei1, Jiande Dz Chen2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a common digestive disease with limited therapeutic options. According to evidence-based clinical practice, acupuncture or electroacupuncture (EA) seems to be a promising therapy for patients with FD. However, there is still a lack of systematic reviews that have analyzed current clinical trials for a better understanding of mechanisms involved in the ameliorating effect of acupuncture and EA on FD. AIM: To evaluate the results and qualities of existing clinical evidence for researching the underlying mechanisms of acupuncture/EA in treating FD.Entities:
Keywords: Acupuncture; Electroacupuncture; Functional dyspepsia; Gastrointestinal motility; Systematic review
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32476804 PMCID: PMC7243644 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v26.i19.2440
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Gastroenterol ISSN: 1007-9327 Impact factor: 5.742
Rome IV criteria for functional dyspepsia
| One or more of the following: |
| Bothersome postprandial fullness |
| Bothersome early satiation |
| Bothersome epigastric pain |
| Bothersome epigastric burning |
| AND |
| No evidence of structural disease (including at upper endoscopy) that is likely to explain the symptoms |
| Postprandial distress syndrome diagnostic criteria |
| Must include one or both of the following at least 3 d per wk: |
| Bothersome postprandial fullness ( |
| Bothersome early satiation ( |
| No evidence of organic, systemic, or metabolic disease that is likely to explain the symptoms on routine investigations (including at upper endoscopy) |
| Supportive remarks: |
| Postprandial epigastric pain or burning, epigastric bloating, excessive belching, and nausea can also be present |
| Vomiting warrants consideration of another disorder |
| Heartburn is not a dyspeptic symptom but may often coexist |
| Symptoms that are relieved by evacuation of feces or gas should generally not be considered as part of dyspepsia |
| Other individual digestive symptoms or groups of symptoms, |
| Epigastric pain syndrome diagnostic criteria |
| Must include at least 1 of the following symptoms at least 1 d a week: |
| Bothersome epigastric pain ( |
| AND/OR |
| Bothersome epigastric burning ( |
| No evidence of organic, systemic, or metabolic disease that is likely to explain the symptoms on routine investigations (including at upper endoscopy) |
| Supportive remarks: |
| Pain may be induced by ingestion of a meal, relieved by ingestion of a meal, or may occur while fasting |
| Postprandial epigastric bloating, belching, and nausea can also be present |
| Persistent vomiting likely suggests another disorder |
| Heartburn is not a dyspeptic symptom but may often coexist |
| The pain does not fulfill biliary pain criteria |
| Symptoms that are relieved by evacuation of feces or gas generally should not be considered as part of dyspepsia |
| Other digestive symptoms (such as from gastroesophageal reflux disease and the irritable bowel syndrome) may coexist with EPS |
Must fulfill criteria for B1a. Postprandial distress syndrome and/or epigastric pain syndrome.
Criteria fulfilled for the last 3 mo with symptom onset at least 6 mo before diagnosis. EPS: Epigastric pain syndrome; PDS: Postprandial distress syndrome.
Characteristics of included studies of acupuncture vs sham, medication or no treatment in treating functional dyspepsia
| Liu et al[ | Cross-over | Yes (chronic stage included) | EXP: TEA (PC6, ST36); CONT: Sham TEA (2 non-acupoints); duration and frequency: 30 min, twice per day, for 2 wk | Decreased dyspepsia symptom scores by 55% in TEA group ( | Gastric motility (myoelectrical activity); neuroactivity (autonomic function); GI hormones | |
| Zeng et al[ | Parallel | No | EXP: EA (ST34, ST36, ST40, ST42); CONT: Sham EA (4 non-acupoints); duration and frequency: 30 min, once per day, 20 sessions in 4 wk | Decreased symptom score in EA greater than sham EA ( | Brain function | |
| Ji et al[ | Cross-over | No | EXP: TEA (PC6, ST36); CONT: Sham TEA (2 non-acupoints); duration and frequency: 2 h, thrice per day, for 2 wk | Improved dyspeptic symptoms in TEA ( | Gastric motility (myoelectrical activity and gastric emptying); gastric accommodation; mental status | |
| Jin et al[ | Parallel | Yes (serum gastrin concentration and gastric slow wave excluded) | EXP: MA (ST36, KI3 ± GB4, PC6, HT7); CONT: Sham MA (non-acupoints); duration and frequency: 20-60 min in EXP/20 min in CONT, once every other d, for 4 wk | Improved dyspeptic symptoms in MA and better than sham MA ( | Mental status | |
| Xu et al[ | Cross-over | Yes (TEA and sham TEA sessions included) | EXP: TEA (PC6, ST36); CONT: Sham TEA (2 non-acupoints); Duration and frequency: 30 min, for 1 session | Improved dyspeptic symptoms in TEA and greater than sham TEA ( | Gastric motility (myoelectrical activity); gastric accommodation; neuroactivity (autonomic function) | |
| Zhang et al[ | Parallel | Yes (EA and control groups included) | EXP: EA (ST36, CV12, PC6, LR3, SP4); CONT: Oral pantoprazole, amitriptylines and mosapride; duration and frequency: 15 min, twice per day, 5-d per wk in EXP; pantoprazole 20 mg with amitriptylines 5 mg, twice per day, and mosapride 5 mg, thrice per day in CONT; for 4 wk | Decreased symptom scores in EA and greater than CONT ( | GI hormones; gastric motility (myoelectrical activity and gastric emptying) | |
| Ko et al[ | Cross-over | Yes (from baseline to the first 4-wk included) | EXP: MA (LI4, ST36, LR3, SP4, CV12 ± GB21, SI14, PC6, EX-HN5, ST34); CONT: No treatment; duration and frequency: 15 min, twice weekly, for 4 wk | Significantly higher PR in MA than CONT ( | Mental status | |
| Qiang et al[ | Parallel | No | EXP: EA (ST36, SP6, SP4, PC6); CONT: Oral mosapride; duration and frequency: 30 min, once per day in EXP; 5 mg, thrice per day in CONT; for 30 d | Decreased symptom score in EA and greater than CONT ( | GI hormones |
P < 0.05, bP < 0.01,
P < 0.001 vs control group;
P < 0.05,
P < 0.01, fP < 0.001 vs sham TEA;
P < 0.05 vs sham EA;
P < 0.05 vs sham MA. A: Acupuncture; CONT: Control group; EA: Electroacupuncture; EXP: Experimental group; F: Female; FD-QOL: Functional dyspepsia-related quality of life; GCSI: Gastroparesis cardinal symptom index; GI: Gastrointestinal; LDQ: Leeds dyspepsia questionnaire; MA: Manual acupuncture; NDI: Nepean dyspepsia index; PDS: Postprandial distress syndrome; PR: Proportion of responders; QOL: Quality of life; SF-36: Short form 36 health survey questionnaires; SID: Symptom index of dyspepsia; TEA: Transcutaneous electrical acustimulation; CI: Confidence interval.
Figure 1Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses flow diagram. FD: Functional dyspepsia; RCT: Randomized controlled trial.
Figure 2Numbers of detecting items for mechanism research, scales of dyspeptic symptoms, and scales of quality of life of acupuncture and electroacupuncture in treating functional dyspepsia. A: Numbers of detecting items for mechanism research; B: Numbers of detecting items for scales of dyspeptic symptoms; C: Numbers of detecting items for scales of quality of life. FD-QOL: Functional dyspepsia-related quality of life; GCSI: Gastroparesis cardinal symptom index; GI hormones: Gastrointestinal hormones; LDQ: Leeds dyspepsia questionnaire; NDI: Nepean dyspepsia index; QOL: Quality of life; SF-36: Short form 36 health survey questionnaires; SID: Symptom index of dyspepsia.
Characteristics of included studies in mechanism research
| Gastric motility | |||
| Liu et al[ | Gastric myoelectrical activity | EGG | Gastric slow wave not altered by TEA |
| Ji et al[ | Gastric myoelectrical activity; Gastric emptying | EGG; Radiogram | Increased percentage of normal slow wave in both fasting and postprandial stages in TEA ( |
| Xu et al[ | Gastric myoelectrical activity | EGG | Increased dominant power and percentage of normal slow wave in postprandial stage in TEA compared with sham TEA ( |
| Zhang et al[ | Gastric myoelectrical activity; gastric emptying | EGG; B-ultrasound | Improved basic frequency and slow wave frequency in EA compared with CONT ( |
| Gastric accommodation | |||
| Ji et al[ | Gastric accommodation | Nutrient drinking test | Improved threshold of satiety volume ( |
| Xu et al[ | Gastric accommodation | Satiety drinking test | Increased maximum tolerable volume in TEA compared with sham TEA ( |
| GI hormones | |||
| Liu et al[ | Plasma NPY and motilin levels | Radioimmunoassay | Increased plasma NPY but not motilin level in TEA ( |
| Zhang et al[ | Plasma motilin level | Radioimmunoassay | Increased plasma motilin level in EA compared with CONT ( |
| Qiang et al[ | Serum ghrelin, CGRP and GLP-1 levels | ELISA | Increased serum ghrelin and GLP-1 levels and decreased CGRP level in EA compared with CONT ( |
| Mental status | |||
| Ji et al[ | Anxiety and depression | SAS/SDS | Decreased anxiety ( |
| Jin et al[ | Anxiety and depression | SAS/SDS | Improved anxiety ( |
| Ko et al[ | Anxiety and depression | STAI/BDI | Decreased anxiety and depression scores in MA ( |
| Central and autonomic functions | |||
| Liu et al[ | Autonomic function | HRV derived from ECG | In fasting stage, higher HF activity ( |
| Zeng et al[ | Cerebral glycometabolism changes | PET-CT scans | Extensive deactivation in cerebral activities in EA compared with the sham EA( |
| Xu et al[ | Autonomic function | HRV derived from ECG | Enhanced vagal activity in TEA compared with sham TEA ( |
P < 0.05,
P < 0.01 vs control group;
P < 0.05,
P < 0.01,
P < 0.001 vs sham TEA;
P < 0.001 vs sham EA. BDI: Beck depression inventory; CGRP: Calcitonin gene-related peptide; CONT: Control group; EA: Electroacupuncture; ECG: Electrocardiogram; EGG: Electrogastrogram; GI: Gastrointestinal; GLP-1: Glucagon-like peptide-1; HRV: Heart rate variability; MA: Manual acupuncture; NPY: Neuropeptide Y; SAS: Zung’s self-rating anxiety scale; SDS: Zung’s self-rating depression scale; STAI: State-trait anxiety inventory; PET-CT: Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxy glucose positron emission tomography computed tomography; TEA: Transcutaneous electrical acustimulation; ELISA: Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay.
Figure 3Risk of bias graph and summary of included studies. A: Risk of bias graph of included studies; B: Risk of bias of included studies.