Dataset Information

Acupuncture for migraine prophylaxis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Acupuncture is often used for migraine prophylaxis but its effectiveness is still controversial. This review (along with a companion review on 'Acupuncture for tension-type headache') represents an updated version of a Cochrane review originally published in Issue 1, 2001, of The Cochrane Library. OBJECTIVES:To investigate whether acupuncture is a) more effective than no prophylactic treatment/routine care only; b) more effective than 'sham' (placebo) acupuncture; and c) as effective as other interventions in reducing headache frequency in patients with migraine. SEARCH STRATEGY:The Cochrane Pain, Palliative & Supportive Care Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field Trials Register were searched to January 2008. SELECTION CRITERIA:We included randomized trials with a post-randomization observation period of at least 8 weeks that compared the clinical effects of an acupuncture intervention with a control (no prophylactic treatment or routine care only), a sham acupuncture intervention or another intervention in patients with migraine. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two reviewers checked eligibility; extracted information on patients, interventions, methods and results; and assessed risk of bias and quality of the acupuncture intervention. Outcomes extracted included response (outcome of primary interest), migraine attacks, migraine days, headache days and analgesic use. Pooled effect size estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS:Twenty-two trials with 4419 participants (mean 201, median 42, range 27 to 1715) met the inclusion criteria. Six trials (including two large trials with 401 and 1715 patients) compared acupuncture to no prophylactic treatment or routine care only. After 3 to 4 months patients receiving acupuncture had higher response rates and fewer headaches. The only study with long-term follow up saw no evidence that effects dissipated up to 9 months after cessation of treatment. Fourteen trials compared a 'true' acupuncture intervention with a variety of sham interventions. Pooled analyses did not show a statistically significant superiority for true acupuncture for any outcome in any of the time windows, but the results of single trials varied considerably. Four trials compared acupuncture to proven prophylactic drug treatment. Overall in these trials acupuncture was associated with slightly better outcomes and fewer adverse effects than prophylactic drug treatment. Two small low-quality trials comparing acupuncture with relaxation (alone or in combination with massage) could not be interpreted reliably. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:In the previous version of this review, evidence in support of acupuncture for migraine prophylaxis was considered promising but insufficient. Now, with 12 additional trials, there is consistent evidence that acupuncture provides additional benefit to treatment of acute migraine attacks only or to routine care. There is no evidence for an effect of 'true' acupuncture over sham interventions, though this is difficult to interpret, as exact point location could be of limited importance. Available studies suggest that acupuncture is at least as effective as, or possibly more effective than, prophylactic drug treatment, and has fewer adverse effects. Acupuncture should be considered a treatment option for patients willing to undergo this treatment.

SUBMITTER: Linde K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3099267 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Acupuncture for migraine prophylaxis.

Linde Klaus K Allais Gianni G Brinkhaus Benno B Manheimer Eric E Vickers Andrew A White Adrian R AR

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20090121 1

<h4>Background</h4>Acupuncture is often used for migraine prophylaxis but its effectiveness is still controversial. This review (along with a companion review on 'Acupuncture for tension-type headache') represents an updated version of a Cochrane review originally published in Issue 1, 2001, of The Cochrane Library.<h4>Objectives</h4>To investigate whether acupuncture is a) more effective than no prophylactic treatment/routine care only; b) more effective than 'sham' (placebo) acupuncture; and c ...[more]

PMID: 19160193

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of manual acupuncture as prophylactic treatment for acupuncture naive patients with episodic migraine without aura.DesignMulticentre, randomised, controlled clinical trial with blinded participants, outcome assessment, and statistician.SettingSeven hospitals in China, 5 June 2016 to 15 November 2018.Participants150 acupuncture naive patients with episodic migraine without aura.Interventions20 sessions of manual acupuncture at true acupuncture points plus usual care, 20 sessions of non-penetrating sham acupuncture at heterosegmental non-acupuncture points plus usual care, or usual care alone over 8 weeks.Main outcome measuresChange in migraine days and migraine attacks per four weeks during weeks 1-20 after randomisation compared with baseline (four weeks before randomisation).ResultsAmong 150 randomised patients (mean age 36.5 (SD 11.4) years; 123 (82%) women), 147 were included in the full analysis set. Compared with sham acupuncture, manual acupuncture resulted in a significantly greater reduction in migraine days at weeks 13 to 20 and a significantly greater reduction in migraine attacks at weeks 17 to 20. The reduction in mean number of migraine days was 3.5 (SD 2.5) for manual versus 2.4 (3.4) for sham (adjusted difference -1.4, 95% confidence interval -2.4 to -0.3; P=0.005) at weeks 13 to 16 and 3.9 (3.0) for manual versus 2.2 (3.2) for sham (adjusted difference -2.1, -2.9 to -1.2; P<0.001) at weeks 17 to 20. At weeks 17 to 20, the reduction in mean number of attacks was 2.3 (1.7) for manual versus 1.6 (2.5) for sham (adjusted difference -1.0, -1.5 to -0.5; P<0.001). No severe adverse events were reported. No significant difference was seen in the proportion of patients perceiving needle penetration between manual acupuncture and sham acupuncture (79% v 75%; P=0.891).ConclusionsTwenty sessions of manual acupuncture was superior to sham acupuncture and usual care for the prophylaxis of episodic migraine without aura. These results support the use of manual acupuncture in patients who are reluctant to use prophylactic drugs or when prophylactic drugs are ineffective, and it should be considered in future guidelines.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02765581.

Project description:BackgroundMigraine is a highly prevalent neurological disorder. It is the third most prevalent disorder and the seventh highest cause of disability worldwide. Acupuncture may be a viable prophylactic treatment option for frequent or uncontrolled migraine. Clinical studies comparing acupuncture and placebo acupuncture have not reached a consistent conclusion in confirming whether acupuncture is effective in migraine prophylaxis. The effect of acupuncture mainly depends on acupoints and needles operation. We found that the design of the placebo acupuncture in previous studies included shallow needling at sham acupoints, non-penetrating needling at sham acupoints, and needling at inactive acupuncture points to achieve the inert effect of control group, but the non-penetrating needling at true acupoints was ignored. This randomized controlled trial aims to use true acupoints for non-penetrating acupuncture as control to evaluate the efficacy of manual acupuncture for the prophylaxis of migraine without aura (MWoA).Methods/designThis is a single-blinded, randomized, controlled, prospective, multi-center trial with two parallel treatment groups. A total of 198 eligible patients with MWoA will be randomly divided into two groups (1:1 allocation ratio). The intervention group will receive manual acupuncture and the control group will receive placebo acupuncture (non-penetrating). Patients will receive three acupuncture treatment sessions per week for 4 consecutive weeks. All patients will then receive a 12-week follow-up.DiscussionIn this study, we are evaluating the efficacy and safety of manual acupuncture in the prophylaxis of MWoA. The placebo control is using non-penetrating needling verum acupoints. It is essential to determine an appropriate control method to ensure the methodological quality of a randomized controlled trial.Trial registrationThe trial has been registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (approval no. ChiCTR2000032308 ) in April 2020.

Project description:IntroductionMigraine prophylactic therapy has changed over recent years with the development and approval of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway. As new therapies emerged, leading headache societies have been providing guidelines on the initiation and escalation of such therapies. However, there is a lack of robust evidence looking at the duration of successful prophylaxis and the effects of therapy discontinuation. In this narrative review we explore both the biological and clinical rationale for prophylactic therapy discontinuation to provide a basis for clinical decision-making.MethodsThree different literature search strategies were conducted for this narrative review. These include i) stopping rules in comorbidities of migraine in which overlapping preventives are prescribed, notably depression and epilepsy; ii) stopping rules of oral treatment and botox; iii) stopping rules of antibodies targeting the CGRP (receptor). Keywords were utilized in the following databases: Embase, Medline ALL, Web of Science Core collection, Cochran Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar.DiscussionReasons to guide decision-making in stopping prophylactic migraine therapies include adverse events, efficacy failure, drug holiday following long-term administration, and patient-specific reasons. Certain guidelines contain both positive and negative stopping rules. Following withdrawal of migraine prophylaxis, migraine burden may return to pre-treatment level, remain unchanged, or lie somewhere in-between. The current suggestion to discontinue CGRP(-receptor) targeted mAbs after 6 to 12 months is based on expert opinion, as opposed to robust scientific evidence. Current guidelines advise the clinician to assess the success of CGRP(-receptor) targeted mAbs after three months. Based on excellent tolerability data and the absence of scientific data, we propose if no other reasons apply, to stop the use of mAbs when the number of migraine days decreases to four or fewer migraine days per month. There is a higher likelihood of developing side effects with oral migraine preventatives, and so we suggest stopping these drugs according to the national guidelines if they are well tolerated.ConclusionTranslational and basic studies are warranted to investigate the long-term effects of a preventive drug after its discontinuation, starting from what is known about the biology of migraine. In addition, observational studies and, eventually, clinical trials focusing on the effect of discontinuation of migraine prophylactic therapies, are essential to substantiate evidence-based recommendations on stopping rules for both oral preventives and CGRP(-receptor) targeted therapies in migraine.

Dataset Information

Acupuncture for migraine prophylaxis.

Publications

Acupuncture for migraine prophylaxis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets