Ying Yi, Wu Hui, Chen Xuyong, Zhou Ji, Sun Yang, Fang Luecheng
Department of Traditional Chinese Medicine, XianJu People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, 317399, Xianju, Zhejiang, China.
Department of Endocrinology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, 310014, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Heliyon. 2024 May 11;10(10):e30965. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30965. eCollection 2024 May 30.
Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is the most common adverse effect of chemotherapy and affects the continuation of chemotherapy in cancer patients. Electrical acupoint stimulation (EAS), which includes electroacupuncture and transcutaneous electrical stimulation (TES), has been used to treat CINV. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of EAS in the treatment of CINV.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of EAS for CINV retrieved form five key databases. Two researchers independently performed article screening, data extraction and data integration. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used to assesse the methodological quality according to Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. RevMan 5.4 was used to perform analyses.
10 RCTs with a total of 950 participants were included. The results showed that there was no significant difference between EAS compared to sham EAS in terms of increasing the rate of complete control of CINV and decreasing the overall incidence of CINV [RR = 1.26, 95 % CI (0.96, 1.66), = 0.95; RR = 1.16, 95 % CI (0.97, 1.40), p = 0.71]. In terms of CINV severity, EAS reduced the occurrence of moderate-to-severe CINV [RR = 0.60, 95 % CI (0.38, 0.94), = 0.03; RR = 0.50, 95 % CI (0.33, 0.76), = 0.001].
EAS could improve moderate-to-severe CINV. However, EAS did not show a significant difference in reducing overall incidence and improving complete control rates compared with sham EAS. Due to limitations in the quality of the included articles, the available studies are insufficient to have sufficient evidence to confirm the efficacy of EAS for CINV. Validation with rigorously designed, large-sample, high-quality clinical trial studies may also be needed.
化疗引起的恶心和呕吐（CINV）是化疗最常见的不良反应，影响癌症患者化疗的持续进行。电穴位刺激（EAS），包括电针和经皮电刺激（TES），已被用于治疗CINV。本荟萃分析旨在评估EAS治疗CINV的疗效。
从五个主要数据库检索EAS治疗CINV的随机对照试验（RCT）。两名研究人员独立进行文章筛选、数据提取和数据整合。根据Cochrane系统评价干预措施手册，使用Cochrane协作网的偏倚风险评估工具来评估方法学质量。使用RevMan 5.4进行分析。
纳入10项RCT，共950名参与者。结果显示，与假EAS相比，EAS在提高CINV完全控制率和降低CINV总体发生率方面无显著差异[风险比（RR）=1.26，95%置信区间（CI）（0.96，1.66），P=0.95；RR=1.16，95%CI（0.97，1.40），P=0.71]。在CINV严重程度方面，EAS降低了中重度CINV的发生率[RR=0.60，95%CI（0.38，0.94），P=0.03；RR=0.50，95%CI（0.33，0.76），P=0.001]。
EAS可改善中重度CINV。然而，与假EAS相比，EAS在降低总体发生率和提高完全控制率方面未显示出显著差异。由于纳入文章质量的局限性，现有研究不足以提供充分证据证实EAS治疗CINV的疗效。可能还需要通过严格设计的大样本高质量临床试验研究进行验证。
