Dataset Information

The effectiveness of catgut implantation at acupoints for allergic rhinitis: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Catgut implantation at acupoint (CIAA) is increasing used in allergic rhinitis therapy, and many studies have published that it is effective in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. However, it is controversy if CIAA can provide an evidence-based clinical benefit in the allergic rhinitis population.

Methods

We will go through 8 databases, and conduct a systematic review of CIAA and health-related outcomes in allergic rhinitis patients according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews. The primary objective is to assess the impact of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines on clinical outcomes relevant to allergic rhinitis patients, such as effective rate, life-quality evaluation, and adverse events. Cochrane Risk Assessment Tool will be used to assess the quality of eligible studies according to the Cochrane handbook.

Results

The results of this systematic review will provide a synthesis of current evidence of CIAA and we have a specific opportunity to determine the efficacy and safety of it.

Conclusion

This study will explore whether or not CIAA can be used as one of the nondrug therapies to prevent or treat allergic rhinitis.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018095074 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails).

SUBMITTER: Zhong J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6946449 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The effectiveness of catgut implantation at acupoints for allergic rhinitis: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zhong Juan J Shen Yifeng Y Liu Shuqin S Dai Menglin M Yang Yepeng Y Zhang Dazheng D Liu Min M Zhang Lijuan L Zhang Qinxiu Q

Medicine 20191201 52

<h4>Background</h4>Catgut implantation at acupoint (CIAA) is increasing used in allergic rhinitis therapy, and many studies have published that it is effective in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. However, it is controversy if CIAA can provide an evidence-based clinical benefit in the allergic rhinitis population.<h4>Methods</h4>We will go through 8 databases, and conduct a systematic review of CIAA and health-related outcomes in allergic rhinitis patients according to the Preferred Reporting ...[more]

PMID: 31876754

Similar Datasets

Project description:Herbal medicine is popularly used among patients who suffer from allergic rhinitis. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of single medicinal plants in the management of allergic rhinitis. We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science for randomised controlled trials which evaluated the use of single medicinal plant for allergic rhinitis among adults and children. Twenty-nine randomised controlled trials (n = 1879) were eligible while 27 (n = 1769) contributed data for meta-analyses. Most studies (studies = 20) compared medicinal plants against placebo and Petasites hybridus was most frequently investigated (studies = 5). Very-low-to-low-certainty evidence suggests that compared to placebo, single medicinal plants may improve overall total nasal symptoms (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.02; participants = 249; studies = 5; I2 = 21%) especially nasal congestion and sneezing; and rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life (RQLQ) scores (MD -0.46, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.07; participants = 148; studies = 3; I2 = 0%). Moderate-certainty evidence show no clear differences between single medicinal plants and antihistamine in overall symptoms (Total nasal symptoms: SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.18; participants = 149; studies = 2; I2 = 0%). As adjunctive therapy, moderate-certainty evidence shows that medicinal plants improved SNOT-22 scores when given as intranasal treatment (MD -7.47, 95% CI -10.75 to -4.18; participants = 124; studies = 2; I2 = 21%). Risk of bias domains were low or not clearly reported in most studies while heterogeneity was substantial in most pooled outcomes. Route of administration and age were identified to be plausible source of heterogeneity for certain outcomes. Medicinal plants appear to be well tolerated up to 8 weeks of use. Clear beneficial evidence of medicinal plants for allergic rhinitis is still lacking. There is a need for improved reporting of herbal trials to allow for critical assessment of the effects of each individual medicinal plant preparation in well-designed future clinical studies.

Project description:IntroductionAllergic rhinitis (AR) is a common allergic disorder that impairs social and physical functioning as well as quality of life. It is characterized by sneezing, rhinorrhea, congestion, and itching which respond suboptimally to drug therapy. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive properties that have shown promise in some studies. We aimed to systematically review LLLT's effectiveness in treating AR and meta-analyze our findings.MethodsA systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted on November 24, 2023. All studies investigating LLLT on AR were included, and a pre-post meta-analysis of nasal symptoms (rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing) in the LLLT-treated arm was conducted. Rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) scores before and after LLLT were also meta-analyzed alongside a pairwise meta-analysis of LLLT with placebo, acupuncture, steroids/antihistamines, and ultraviolet lasers. A random-effects model was used with a conservative pre-post correlation of 0.4 and standardized mean difference (SMD) as the effect size.ResultsSixteen studies were included in this review, and we found that nasal symptoms are alleviated post-LLLT in people with AR (SMD: -1.4, 95 CI: [-2.07 to -1.13], p value <0.001). RQLQ scores were also reduced after LLLT (SMD = -0.72, 95 CI: [-0.94 to -0.50], p value <0.001), and very few adverse events were reported. This meta-analysis, however, had significant publication bias and heterogeneity. When compared to a placebo, LLLT did not significantly improve nasal symptoms (SMD: -0.69, p value = 0.167), which might mean the post-LLLT nasal symptom alleviation is due to a placebo effect. Comparisons to other treatment modalities were too few to deduce anything meaningful, although it does appear that LLLT is less effective than UV lasers.ConclusionLLLT is most likely effective at alleviating nasal symptomology and has a low likelihood of adverse event incidence, yet more high-quality studies with larger sample sizes are needed to compare LLLT to a placebo to ensure its superiority to the placebo effect, as well as non-inferiority clinical trials to compare it to standard treatments.

Dataset Information

The effectiveness of catgut implantation at acupoints for allergic rhinitis: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The effectiveness of catgut implantation at acupoints for allergic rhinitis: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets