Li Xin-rong, Zhang Qin-xiu, Liu Min, Chen Qing, Liu Yang, Zhang Fu-bing, Deng Jing, Zhong Zhen-dong
Clinical Medical College of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 610072, China.
Chin J Integr Med. 2014 Mar;20(3):235-40. doi: 10.1007/s11655-014-1748-z. Epub 2014 Mar 4.
To assess the effectiveness and the possible adverse effects of catgut implantation at acupoints for allergic rhinitis (AR).
This systematic review was carried out in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook version 5.1.0 and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Extensive literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Excerpta Medical Databases, the Cochrane Library, the China National Infrastructure, Wanfang Chinese Digital Periodical and Conference Database, and the Weipu Chinese Science and Technique Journals Database. The Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Center was also searched for ongoing trials up to September 2012. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs were included. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias.
Five RCTs with 285 participants were found from 49 relevant studies, but there was just one RCT which met the inclusion criteria for this review. The study showed that treatment of catgut implantation at acupoints could lead to a better alleviation of the signs and symptoms of AR than the crude herb moxibustion. No adverse events were reported in this study.
Because of the methodological shortcoming and the risk of bias of the included trial, catgut implantation was proved with only limited evidence for the treatment of AR. Robust RCTs with high quality and larger sample size in this field are hoped to be carried out in the future.
评估穴位埋线治疗变应性鼻炎（AR）的有效性及可能的不良反应。
本系统评价按照Cochrane手册第5.1.0版及系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目声明进行。在PubMed、医学文摘数据库、Cochrane图书馆、中国国家知识基础设施、万方中文数字化期刊及会议数据库、维普中文科技期刊数据库中进行广泛的文献检索。还检索了中国临床试验注册中心截至2012年9月的正在进行的试验。纳入随机对照试验（RCT）或半随机对照试验。使用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具进行偏倚风险评估。
从49项相关研究中发现5项RCT，共285名参与者，但只有1项RCT符合本评价的纳入标准。该研究表明，穴位埋线治疗比单纯艾灸能更好地缓解AR的体征和症状。本研究未报告不良事件。
由于纳入试验的方法学缺陷和偏倚风险，穴位埋线治疗AR的证据有限。希望未来能开展该领域高质量、大样本量的RCT。
