Dataset Information

Cupping Therapy for Migraine: A PRISMA-Compliant Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Migraine is a common reason for primary headache disorders. Cupping is a frequently used traditional intervention for controlling pain including migraine. There have been no systematic reviews on the clinical effects of cupping on migraine.

Objective

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of cupping therapy for migraine. The search strategy was built for the presence of related keywords, such as "migraine" and "cupping therapy", in the title and abstract of research articles indexed in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and other databases. The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cupping therapy for migraine were searched and selected from inception to May 2019. We searched eight databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The selection process and the quality assessment were performed by 2 authors independently. The meta-analysis was conducted and qualitative analysis was also performed.

Results

218 studies were identified, and 6 RCTs were enrolled in this review. In comparison to drugs, wet cupping showed a higher total effective rate (TER). In the dry cupping plus acupuncture, the result of TER showed more effectiveness (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.12, P=0.13) compared with acupuncture alone, but there was no statistically significant difference. In qualitative analysis, the results showed wet cupping plus drugs treatment could quickly relieve pain and significantly improve patients' quality of life and wet cupping could reduce headache pain.

Conclusion

Cupping therapy could be effective for the treatment of migraine. However, the qualities of the evidence were low, so well-designed RCTs are needed to confirm the effectiveness of cupping. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number is CRD42017054979.

SUBMITTER: Seo J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8016589 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOsteoporosis, more likely to occur in postmenopausal women, is a chronic condition that usually requires a long-term treatment strategy, but the use of either antiresorptive or anabolic drugs should be limited to 18 to 24 months. Discontinuing antiosteoporosis drugs may result in rapidly declining bone mineral density (BMD). Therefore, many patients are treated with the sequential use of 2 or more drugs. However, whether switching treatment from anabolic to antiresorptive drugs or the reverse could maintain or further increase BMD; and whether the sequential therapy could outperform the monotherapy under the same treatment duration still remains unclear. Nowadays, no firm conclusions were drawn.MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library from January 1, 1974 until February 1, 2016 to identify all randomized controlled trials for evaluating the effectiveness of sequential therapy of antiresorptive and anabolic drugs in postmenopausal osteoporosis women with the BMD changes of lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip as the outcomes. We evaluated the methodological quality and abstracted relevant data according to the Cochrane Handbook.ResultsEight trials involving 1509 patients were included. The pooled data showed that after switching treatment, the alternative drugs maintained the BMD and significantly increased the percentage change in BMD at the lumbar spine (MD, 3.59; 95% CI, 2.26-4.93), femoral neck (MD, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.60-2.27), and total hip (MD, 1.24; 95% CI, -0.12 to 2.60), although change in BMD was not significantly increased at the total hip. The sequential therapy significantly increased BMD from baseline at the lumbar spine (SMD, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.26-0.91), femoral neck (SMD, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.06-0.37), and total hip (SMD, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.01-0.56).ConclusionsAfter switching treatment, sequential therapy further increased BMD. The sequential therapy showed a more significant improvement in BMD compared with any anti-resorptive drug given for the same treatment duration and was as effective as anabolic drugs. Thus, sequential therapy may be recommended as an effective treatment for osteoporotic women. However, more randomized controlled trials are still needed to determine the best sequence and the most appropriate drugs of sequential therapy.

Project description:Both cupping therapy and acupuncture have been used in China for a long time, and their target indications are pain-related conditions. There is no systematic review comparing the effectiveness of these two therapies.To compare the beneficial effectiveness and safety between cupping therapy and acupuncture for pain-related conditions to provide evidence for clinical practice.Protocol of this review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016050986). We conducted literature search from six electronic databases until 31st March 2017. We included randomized trials comparing cupping therapy with acupuncture on pain-related conditions. Methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated by risk of bias tool. Mean difference, risk ratio, risk difference and their 95% confidence interval were used to report the estimate effect of the pooled results through meta-analysis or the results from each individual study. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was applied to adjust random errors and calculate the sample size.Twenty-three randomized trials with 2845 participants were included covering 12 pain-related conditions. All included studies were of poor methodological quality. Three meta-analyses were conducted, which showed similar clinical beneficial effects of cupping therapy and acupuncture for the rate of symptom improvement in cervical spondylosis (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.26; n = 646), lateral femoral cutaneous neuritis (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.22; n = 102) and scapulohumeral periarthritis (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.51; n = 208). Results from other outcomes (such as visual analogue and numerical rating scale) in each study also showed no statistical significant difference between these two therapies for all included pain-related conditions. The results of TSA for cervical spondylosis demonstrated that the current available data have not reached a powerful conclusion. No serious adverse events related to cupping therapy or acupuncture was found in included studies.Cupping therapy and acupuncture are potentially safe, and they have similar effectiveness in relieving pain. However, further rigorous studies investigating relevant pain-related conditions are warranted to establish comparative effectiveness analysis between these two therapies. Cost-effectiveness studies should be considered in the future studies to establish evidence for decision-making in clinical practice.

Project description:BackgroundTriple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) lacks the expression of the estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and receptor tyrosine-protein kinase erbB-2 (HER2/neu), which renders hormone-related endocrine and targeted therapy essentially futile.ObjectiveWe performed a meta-analysis to assess the effects of antitumor regimens in the treatment of TNBC patients.MethodsWe searched electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, through January 2017 using the following keywords: "triple negative breast cancer," "TNBC," and "random*" without language restrictions. The major outcome in the present analysis was the overall response rate (ORR), and the secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A network meta-analysis and multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression were used to compare antitumor regimens.ResultsWe included 35 articles assessing a total of 8476 TNBC patients in our systematic review. The regimen of Bevacizumab, Carboplatin, and Paclitaxel (78.2%) was the most likely to improve the ORR in TNBC patients, followed by EndoTAG-1 and Paclitaxel (69.7%), Carboplatin and Paclitaxel (65.0%), and Bevacizumab and Paclitaxel (61.8%). In the patients without metastasis, the regimen of Bevacizumab, Carboplatin, and Paclitaxel (74.9%) remained the most likely to improve the ORR. We could not analyze the results for patients with metastasis or outcomes of PFS and OS because no >4 regimens formed a network. In the regression analysis, Bevacizumab (odds ratio [OR], 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-2.05; P < .001) and Carboplatin (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.62-2.64; P < .001) correlated with superior ORR outcome, and Iniparib (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.11-2.07; P = .009) correlated with superior OS outcome.ConclusionThe regimen including Bevacizumab, Carboplatin, and Paclitaxel was the most likely to improve the ORR in TNBC patients and in advanced metastatic TNBC patients. The administration of Bevacizumab and Carboplatin provided greater benefit toward improved patient ORR.