Kim Youngjin, Park Ha-Im, Chu Hongmin, Jin Hanbit, Leem Jungtae
Wonkwang University Korean Medicine Hospital, Iksan, Republic of Korea.
Wonkwang University Gwangju Korean Medicine Hospital, Gwangju, Republic of Korea.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 Aug 21;11:1446515. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1446515. eCollection 2024.
The effectiveness and safety of acupuncture in the treatment of obesity have not been assessed. This poses a challenge for clinicians who choose to use acupuncture in the treatment of obesity, as they are unable to prioritize this approach based on outcome variables.
In May 2024, a literature search of five databases was conducted. Only randomized controlled trials evaluating body weight (BW), body mass index, waist circumference (WC), and adverse events in patients with a body mass index (BMI) of 25 or higher for various acupuncture modalities were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials, version 2. Pairwise meta-analysis (PMA) and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) were performed using a random effects model for quantitative synthesis.
Fourteen studies ( = 868) were included. The included studies evaluated the following acupuncture modalities: electroacupuncture (EA) ( = 6), laser acupuncture (LA) ( = 2), auricular acupuncture (AA) ( = 5), and manual acupuncture (MA) ( = 3). The PMA found that adding EA to usual care (UC), compared to UC alone, reduced BW (MD = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.12 to 3.80, = 58%, REM, = 3, = 157). The NMA of BW showed the following effect sizes for UC alone versus each acupuncture modality combined with UC: LA (MD = 2.09, 95% CI = 0.04 to 3.86), EA (MD = 2.04, 95% CI = 0.88 to 3.50), AA (MD = 1.69, 95% CI = -0.11 to 3.58), and MA (MD = 1.02, 95% CI = -0.82 to 2.94). The probability of each modality being the optimal treatment was evaluated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. EA was the most efficacious for BW and BMI, while LA was the most efficacious for WC.
EA and LA can effectively complement clinical obesity management. The number of included studies was limited, and publication bias may have occurred, necessitating a cautious interpretation of the results. Furthermore, most studies lasted between six and 12 weeks. Future clinical studies of acupuncture for obesity should include longer follow-up periods.
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=387788, identifier CRD42023387788.
针刺治疗肥胖症的有效性和安全性尚未得到评估。这给选择使用针刺治疗肥胖症的临床医生带来了挑战,因为他们无法根据结果变量来优先考虑这种治疗方法。
2024年5月,对五个数据库进行了文献检索。纳入的研究仅限于对体重(BW)、体重指数、腰围(WC)以及体重指数(BMI)为25或更高的患者接受各种针刺方式治疗时的不良事件进行评估的随机对照试验。使用Cochrane随机试验偏倚风险工具第2版评估偏倚风险。采用随机效应模型进行成对荟萃分析(PMA)和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析(NMA)以进行定量综合分析。
纳入了14项研究(n = 868)。纳入的研究评估了以下针刺方式:电针(EA)(n = 6)、激光针(LA)(n = 2)、耳针(AA)(n = 5)和手针(MA)(n = 3)。PMA发现,与单纯常规护理(UC)相比,在UC基础上加用EA可降低BW(MD = 2.46,95%CI = 1.12至3.80,I² = 58%,随机效应模型,k = 3,N = 157)。BW的NMA显示了单纯UC与每种针刺方式联合UC的以下效应量:LA(MD = 2.09,95%CI = 0.04至3.86)、EA(MD = 2.04,95%CI = 0.88至3.50)、AA(MD = 1.69,95%CI = -0.11至3.58)和MA(MD = 1.02,95%CI = -0.82至2.94)。使用累积排名曲线下的面积评估每种方式成为最佳治疗方法的概率。EA对BW和BMI最有效,而LA对WC最有效。
EA和LA可有效补充临床肥胖管理。纳入研究的数量有限,可能存在发表偏倚,因此对结果需谨慎解读。此外,大多数研究持续6至12周。未来针刺治疗肥胖症的临床研究应包括更长的随访期。
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=387788,标识符CRD42023387788 。