Acupuncture as an alternative or in addition to conventional treatment for chronic non-specific low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Conventional therapies (CTs), pharmacological (PH) and non-pharmacological (NPH), do not always achieve benefits in the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP). We assessed efficacy and safety of acupuncture for CLBP as alternative or addition to CT.

Methods

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing acupuncture alone or in combination with CT to CT. We searched Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase up to May 2022. We assessed risk of bias with the original Cochrane tool and GRADE certainty of evidence. Results were pooled through meta-analysis.

Results

Ten RCTs (2122 participants) were included comparing acupuncture versus CT and 4 RCTs (374 participants) were comparing acupuncture plus CT to CT alone. In terms of comparing acupuncture with NPH or PH, no differences were found for pain and disability. Comparing acupuncture with PH and NPH combined, pain and disability were reduced (SMD=-0.50, 95% CI -0.62 to -0.37; SMD=-0.71, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.24). Comparing acupuncture plus NPH with NPH alone, pain and disability were reduced (SMD=-0.70, 95% CI -0.94 to -0.46; SMD=-0.95, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.54). Comparing acupuncture plus PH with PH alone, pain and disability were reduced (MD=-0.21, 95% CI -433.28 to -10.42; MD=-3.1, 95% CI -4.87 to -1.83). Comparing acupuncture plus combined treatment versus combined treatment alone, no differences were found in pain, while disability was reduced (MD=-3.40 95% CI -5.17 to -1.63). No studies assessed adverse event. Certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low.

Conclusions

We are uncertain whether acupuncture is more effective and safer than CT. In the comparisons without estimates' imprecision, acupuncture showed promising results. Acupuncture could be an option based on patients' preferences.

A Randomized Clinical Trial on Acupuncture Versus Best Medical Therapy in Episodic Migraine Prophylaxis: The ACUMIGRAN Study

Introduction: A large corpus of evidence has reported encouraging results for acupuncture as a prophylaxis therapy for migraine. However, trials that investigated the efficacy of acupuncture in comparison with pharmacological treatment in episodic migraine showed conflicting results. The study aimed to evaluate if acupuncture is as effective as evidence-based pharmacological drugs in episodic migraine prophylaxis. Methods: This is a randomized controlled clinical study. Patients suffering from migraine without preventive treatment in the past 3 months were recruited. After the run-in period, episodic migraineurs were assigned randomly to two groups: the acupuncture group (A) was treated with 12 sessions of acupuncture, and the pharmacological group (B) was treated with the most appropriate medication for each patient. Headache frequency was compared at baseline and at the end of treatment. Both groups were evaluated 3 and 6 months after treatment. Results: A total of 148 patients (24 males and 124 females) were enrolled in the study. Out of these, 69 were randomized to A and 66 to B. At baseline, no significant differences were found between the two groups. Of the patients, 15.5% (21/135) interrupted the treatment, especially those randomized to B. After 4 months, migraine frequency decreased from 8.58 ± 3.21 to 6.43 ± 3.45 in A and from 8.29 ± 2.72 to 6.27 ± 4.01 in B. Headache frequency decreased significantly after treatment without differences between the two groups (time-effect: p < 0.001; group effect: p = 0.332; interaction time-group effects: p = 0.556). Approximately 34% of patients showed a reduction of headache days by at least 50% after the treatment. The improvements observed at the end of treatment persisted in 57.3% (59/103) after 3 months and 38.8% (40/103) after 6 months, especially in patients randomized to A. Conclusions: Our trial is the first one comparing acupuncture with the more appropriate pharmacological treatment for migraine prophylaxis. Data suggested that acupuncture could be adopted as migraine prophylaxis and seem to be slightly superior to pharmacological treatment in compliance and rate of adverse events.

Acupuncture vs. Pharmacological Prophylaxis of Migraine: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Introduction: Migraine is a chronic paroxymal neurological disorder characterized by attacks of moderate to severe headache and reversible neurological and systemic symptoms. Treatment of migraine includes acute therapies, that aim to reduce the intensity of pain of each attack, and preventive therapies that should decrease the frequency of headache recurrence. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for the prophylaxis of episodic or chronic migraine in adult patients compared to pharmacological treatment.

Methods: We included randomized-controlled trials published in western languages that compared any treatment involving needle insertion (with or without manual or electrical stimulation) at acupuncture points, pain points or trigger points, with any pharmacological prophylaxis in adult (≥18 years) with chronic or episodic migraine with or without aura according to the criteria of the International Headache Society.

Results: Nine randomized trials were included encompassing 1,484 patients. At the end of intervention we found a small reduction in favor of acupuncture for the number of days with migraine per month: (SMD: −0.37; 95% CI −1.64 to −0.11), and for response rate (RR: 1.46; 95% CI 1.16–1.84). We found a moderate effect in the reduction of pain intensity in favor of acupuncture (SMD: −0.36; 95% CI −0.60 to −0.13), and a large reduction in favor of acupuncture in both the dropout rate due to any reason (RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.84) and the dropout rate due to adverse event (RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.74). Quality of evidence was moderate for all these primary outcomes. Results at longest follow-up confirmed these effects.

Conclusions: Based on moderate certainty of evidence, we conclude that acupuncture is mildly more effective and much safer than medication for the prophylaxis of migraine.

Acupuncture for migraine: a protocol for a meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Although the effectiveness of acupuncture for episodic migraine has been confirmed by multiple clinical trials and Cochrane systematic reviews, the mechanisms underlying the specific effect of acupuncture for migraine remain controversial. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for both episodic migraine and chronic migraine by meta-analysis and explore the possible factors influencing the specific effect of acupuncture for migraine by meta-regression.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search for randomised control trials of acupuncture for migraine in the following eight databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED (via OVID) and four Chinese databases (Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database and Wanfang Database) from inception to 31 December 2017. We will also search OpenSIGLE (opensigle.inist.fr) for conference abstracts. No language restriction will be applied. The selection of studies, data extraction and coding and assessment of risk of bias of the included studies will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Standard meta-analysis and, if appropriate, meta-regression will be performed using the R packages Meta and Metafor.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The results of this meta-analysis and meta-regression will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a relevant conference. The data used in this meta-analysis will not contain individual patient data; therefore, ethical approval is not required.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018087270.