| Literature DB >> 35799631 |
Xiaoxue Jiang1, Xiutian Guo2, Jianhua Zhou1, Sunsong Ye3.
Abstract
Objective: This study was aimed at comparing the clinical efficacy of acupuncture and moxibustion on irritable bowel syndrome complicated with diarrhea (IBS-D) in adults and providing guidance for clinical treatment.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35799631 PMCID: PMC9256328 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9919839
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.809
Figure 1Process and results of literature screening.
Basic characteristics of the included studies.
| Author | Group | Interventions | Cases | Age (years) | Frequency | Duration | Outcome measures | Shedding and adverse reactions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guo et al. [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture | 154 | 46 ± 12 | 1/2 days | 6 w | ① | Treatment group 1: 5 cases withdrew due to inability to adhere to acupuncture, 3 cases missed visit; treatment group 2: 4 cases withdrew due to unsatisfactory efficacy, 2 cases due to adverse reactions, 1 case due to inability to adhere to medication, 4 cases withdrew for no clear reason |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 77 | 44 ± 13 | 50 mgTID | In treatment group 1, there were 7 cases of subcutaneous hematoma, and in treatment group 2, there were 2 cases of dry mouth, 2 cases of dizziness, and 1 case of nausea, which resolved on their own without adverse reactions | |||
| Liu [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture | 30 | 42.32 ± 7.62 | 1/day | 4 w | ①② | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 30 | 41.77 ± 8.99 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Mao [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture | 40 | 46.38 ± 11.47 | 3/week | 6 w | ①② | 1 case of anxiety and depression and 1 case of mild hematemesis occurred in the treatment group; 4 cases of mild nausea and vomiting occurred in the treatment group 2, all of which did not affect the follow-up treatment and had no adverse effects |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 40 | 47.49 ± 12.39 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Li et al. [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture | 51 | 46 ± 13 | 1/2 days | 6 w | ① | Treatment group 1, 3 cases of shedding, 2 cases were unable to complete the treatment on time due to their own work, and 1 case withdrew from the study because of poor compliance due to self-administration of relevant drugs during the treatment; treatment group 2, 1 case of shedding, and this patient complained of worsening symptoms after taking the drugs and refused to continue taking them. There were no special adverse events such as dizziness, bent needle, and stagnant needle |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 26 | 48 ± 13 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Li et al. [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture | 30 | 46 ± 16 | 2 days/1 time | 8 w | ① | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 30 | 44 ± 16 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Han [ | Treat 1 | Warming needle moxibustion | 50 | 44.8 ± 9.5 | 3-4/week | 1 m | ① | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 50 | 45.3 + 10.2 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Li et al. [ | Treat 1 | Electroacupuncture | 30 | 39.1 ± 11.8 | 3-4/week | 4 w | ①② | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 30 | 37.9 ± 11.5 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Lu [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture | 38 | 54.59 ± 12.50 | 1/day | 4 w | ① | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 38 | 54.54 ± 11.96 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Meng [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture | 35 | 39.3 ± 11.5 | 5/week | 4 w | ① | Treatment group 1: 1 case of dizziness, treatment group 2: 5 cases of minor adverse reactions, 2 cases of rash, 1 case of pruritus and 2 cases of nausea, all without serious adverse reactions |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 35 | 38.4 ± 13.5 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Pei et al. [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture | 30 | 39.1 ± 11.8 | 5/week | 4 w | ① | Treatment group 1 : 3 cases of shedding |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 30 | 37.93 ± 11.45 | 50 mgTID | Treatment group 2: 2 cases of shedding | |||
| Sun et al. [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture | 30 | 38.81 ± 11.80 | 5/week | 4 w | ①② | Treatment group 1: 1 case of shedding; treatment group 2: 2 cases of shedding; all the above are due to follow up shedding; no adverse reaction |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 30 | 38.59 ± 11.45 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Zhang et al. [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture | 31 | 39.5 ± 2.1 | 3/week | 4 w | ① | Treatment group 1: 2 withdrawals: 1 due to personal matters and the other due to fear of needles); treatment group 2: 2 withdrawals, 1 taking other medication without permission; the other unable to complete the intervention due to work |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 30 | 39.9 ± 2.1 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Mou et al. [ | Treat 1 | Warming needle moxibustion | 29 | 41.21 | 1/2days | 2 w | ① | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Acupuncture | 28 | 47.06 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Deng and Zhu [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture+sandwiched moxibustion | 30 | 54.33 ± 7.22 | 1/day | 20 d | ① | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Acupuncture | 30 | 54.33 ± 7.22 | 1/day | ||||
| Pang [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture+sandwiched moxibustion | 39 | 37.8 ± 11.5 | 1/day | 20 d | ① | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Acupuncture | 37 | 34.9 ± 10.1 | 1/day | ||||
| Hu et al. [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture+heat-sensitive moxibustion | 32 | 46.8 ± 11.5 | 1/day | 8 w | ① | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Acupuncture | 32 | 47.9 ± 11.2 | 1/day | ||||
| Gu [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture+acupoint application | 30 | 38.24 ± 11.32 | 5/week | 20 d | ① | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Pinaverium bromide | 30 | 37.53 ± 10.21 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Geng and Yang [ | Treat 1 | Warming needle moxibustion | 40 | 43.29 ± 5.11 | 2/week | 4 w | ① | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Acupuncture | 40 | 48.99 ± 6.07 | 2/week | ||||
| Mou and Wang [ | Treat 1 | Warming needle moxibustion | 29 | 44.21 ± 14.04 | 1/day | 20 d | ① | Not mentioned |
| Treat 2 | Acupuncture | 28 | 47.06 ± 14.84 | 1/day | ||||
| Li [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture+thunder-fire Moxibustion | 30 | 40.12 ± 9.69 | 1/day | 4 w | ①② | 1 case shed in the acupuncture group; 2 cases shed in the drug group |
| Treat 2 | Acupuncture | 29 | 38.73 ± 11.74 | 1/day | ||||
| Treat 1 | Pinaverium bromide | 28 | 38.32 ± 11.25 | 50 mgTID | ||||
| Kong et al. [ | Treat 1 | Acupuncture+ginger-isolated moxibustion | 30 | 40 ± 9 | 1/day | 4 w | ② | 1 case shed in the acupuncture group; 2 cases shed in the drug group |
| Treat 2 | Acupuncture | 30 | 38 ± 11 | 1/day | ||||
| Treat 1 | Pinaverium bromide | 30 | 38 ± 11 | 50 mgTID |
Three-arm experiment; ① efficiency rate; ② life quality score QOL.
Figure 2(a) Risk of bias summary. (b) Risk of bias graph.
Figure 3Evidence network plot of different acupuncture and moxibustion therapies for IBS-D: (a) network diagram of overall efficacy and (b) network diagram of quality of life (QOL). (A) acupuncture; (B) warming needle moxibustion; (C) electroacupuncture; (D) acupuncture+sandwiched moxibustion; (E) acupuncture+heat-sensitive moxibustion; (F) acupuncture+acupoint application; (G) acupuncture+thunder-fire moxibustion; (H) pinaverium bromide.
Network meta-analysis of the overall efficacy of different acupuncture and moxibustion therapies for IBS-D [OR (95% CI)].
| B | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.30 (0.21,8.00) | A | ||||||
| 0.49 (0.14,1.75) | 0.38 (0.05,2.65) | D | |||||
| 0.64 (0.10,4.11) | 0.50 (0.05,5.30) | 1.30 (0.18,9.19) | E | ||||
| 1.49 (0.23,9.47) | 1.15 (0.11,11.80) | 3.01 (0.42,21.56) | 2.31 (0.21,25.34) | F | |||
| 1.77 (0.29,10.67) | 1.36 (0.14,13.64) | 3.58 (0.53,24.18) | 2.75 (0.26,28.72) | 1.19 (0.12,12.18) | G | ||
| 6.34 (2.83,14.21) | 4.89 (0.96,24.97) | 12.83 (4.49,36.64) | 9.86 (1.77,55.00) | 4.26 (0.81,22.53) | 3.58 (0.71,18.21) | H | |
| 2.23 (1.02,4.85) | 1.72 (0.32,9.09) | 4.50 (1.67,12.14) | 3.46 (0.64,18.65) | 1.50 (0.27,8.19) | 1.26 (0.25,6.44) | 0.35 (0.25,0.49) | A |
A, acupuncture; B, warming needle moxibustion; C, electroacupuncture; D, acupuncture + sandwiched moxibustion; E, acupuncture+heat-sensitive moxibustion; F, acupuncture+acupoint application; G, acupuncture+thunder-fire moxibustion; H, pinaverium bromide.
Figure 4SUCRA of the overall efficacy of different acupuncture and moxibustion therapies for IBS-D: (a), acupuncture; (b), warming needle moxibustion; (c), electroacupuncture; (d), acupuncture+sandwiched moxibustion; (e), acupuncture+heat-sensitive moxibustion; (f), acupuncture+acupoint application; (g), acupuncture+thunder-fire moxibustion; (h), pinaverium bromide.
Network meta-analysis of the QOL of different acupuncture and moxibustion therapies for IBS-D [SMD (95% CI)].
| A | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| -27.81 (-216.31,160.68) | B | |||
| -63.17 (-216.16,89.82) | -35.36 (-265.72,195.01) | C | ||
| -54.70 (-207.62,98.21) | -26.89 (-257.25,203.47) | 8.46 (-200.91,217.84) | D | |
| 34.59 (-41.78,110.96) | 62.40 (-109.98,234.78) | 97.76 (-55.08,250.60) | 89.30 (-63.54,242.13) | E |
A, acupuncture; B, warming needle moxibustion; C, electroacupuncture; D, acupuncture+sandwiched moxibustion; E, acupuncture+heat-sensitive moxibustion.
Figure 5SUCRA of the QOL of different acupuncture and moxibustion therapies for IBS-D: (a), acupuncture; (b), warming needle moxibustion; (c), electroacupuncture; (d), acupuncture+sandwiched moxibustion; (e), acupuncture+heat-sensitive moxibustion.
Figure 6Consistency test of different acupuncture and moxibustion therapies for IBS-D: (a) consistency test of loops of total efficiency and (b) consistency test of loops of QOL. (A) acupuncture; (B) warming needle moxibustion; (C) electroacupuncture; (D) acupuncture+sandwiched moxibustion; (E) acupuncture+heat-sensitive moxibustion; (F) acupuncture+acupoint application; (G) acupuncture+thunder-fire moxibustion; (H) pinaverium bromide.
Figure 7Adjusted funnel plot of the overall efficacy of different acupuncture and moxibustion therapies for IBS-D: (A) acupuncture; (B) warming needle moxibustion; (C) electroacupuncture; (D) acupuncture+sandwiched moxibustion; (E) acupuncture+heat-sensitive moxibustion; (F) acupuncture+acupoint application; (G) acupuncture+thunder-fire moxibustion; (H) pinaverium bromide.
Distribution of acupoints selected for acupuncture treatment in each of the included studies.
| Name of acupuncture point | Frequency | Place | Channel tropism |
|---|---|---|---|
| GV 20 | 11 | Head | Governor vessel |
| GV 29 | 9 | Forehead | Extra point |
| ST 25 | 21 | Abdomen | Stomach Meridian foot-yangming. Front Mu point of the large intestine |
| ST 37 | 15 | Leg | Stomach Meridian foot-yangming. Lower He-sea point of the large intestine |
| ST 36 | 17 | Leg | Stomach Meridian foot-yangming. |
| SP 6 | 12 | Leg | Spleen Meridian of foot-Taiyin |
| LR 3 | 15 | Foot | Liver Meridian of foot-Jueyin |
| BL20 | 7 | Back | Bladder Meridian of foot-Taiyang |
| CV 12 | 6 | Abdomen | Conception vessel |
| BL25 | 5 | Lumbar | Bladder Meridian of foot-Taiyang, Back-Shu point of the large intestine |