Review of systematic reviews of acupuncture for diabetic peripheral neuropathy
- VernacularTitle:针刺治疗糖尿病性周围神经病变系统评价的再评价
- Author:
Wei-Jing FAN
;
Shi-Bing LIANG
;
Qiang HAN
;
Ren-Yan HUANG
;
Feng XU
;
Guo-Bin LIU
- Keywords:
Acupuncture Therapy;
Diabetes Mellitus;
Type 2;
Diabetic Neuropathies;
Peripheral Nervous System Diseases;
Systematic Review
- From:
Journal of Acupuncture and Tuina Science
2021;19(2):95-103
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective: To review the systematic reviews of acupuncture for diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) and to provide evidence for clinical decisions. Methods: Published systematic reviews targeting acupuncture treatment of DPN were searched using computer through both Chinese and English databases till July 1, 2019. Two researchers screened the papers based on inclusion and exclusion criteria and conducted report quality evaluation, methodological quality assessment and evidence quality grading using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA), assessment of multiple systematic review 2 (AMSTAR 2) and grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE). Results: Ten systematic reviews were included, involving 11 outcome measures. According to PRISMA, 6 items were sufficiently reported while 1 item was not; AMSTAR 2 appraised that all the included systematic reviews were of low quality in the methodological evaluation; according to GRADE, of the 30 clinical evidences, only 5 were graded moderate while the remained were graded low or extremely low. Descriptive analysis showed that acupuncture can significantly improve DPN symptoms, accelerate the conduction velocities of sensory and motor nerves, and up-regulate the content of plasma nitric oxide (NO), while the adverse reaction rate was low. Conclusion: Acupuncture can produce satisfactory clinical efficacy in treating DPN, but the existing problems, such as low-quality evidence, unitary outcome measures, poor methodological quality of systematic reviews and nonstandard reporting, need to be treated cautiously; meanwhile, more high-quality clinical trials are required to elevate the level of evidence.
