Does acupuncture at motor-related acupoints affect corticospinal excitability? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
10.1016/j.joim.2025.02.004
- Author:
Renming LIU
1
;
Aung Aung Kywe MOE
2
;
Weiting LIU
3
;
Maryam ZOGHI
4
;
Shapour JABERZADEH
5
Author Information
1. Monash Neuromodulation Research Unit, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, Melbourne 3199, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: renming.liu@monash.edu.
2. Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne 3199, Victoria, Australia.
3. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Edith Cowan University, Perth 6027, Victoria, Australia.
4. Discipline of Physiotherapy, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, Federation University, Melbourne 3353, Victoria, Australia.
5. Monash Neuromodulation Research Unit, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, Melbourne 3199, Victoria, Australia.
- Publication Type:Meta-Analysis
- Keywords:
Acupuncture;
Brain excitability;
Corticospinal excitability;
Motor function;
Motor-related acupoints
- MeSH:
Humans;
Evoked Potentials, Motor/physiology*;
Acupuncture Points;
Acupuncture Therapy/methods*;
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation;
Electroacupuncture;
Pyramidal Tracts/physiology*
- From:
Journal of Integrative Medicine
2025;23(2):113-125
- CountryChina
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND:Acupuncture is widely used in modulating brain excitability and motor function, as a form of complementary and alternative medicine. However, there is no existing meta-analysis evaluating the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture on corticospinal excitability (CSE), and the credibility of the evidence has yet to be quantified.
OBJECTIVE:This study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of electroacupuncture (EA) and manual acupuncture (MA) in enhancing brain excitability, specifically focusing on CSE as measured by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS).
SEARCH STRATEGY:This study followed a systematic approach, searching 9 databases up to August 2024 and examining grey literature, in compliance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
INCLUSION CRITERIA:Studies were included if they compared the clinical efficacy of EA or MA with sham acupuncture, no treatment or usual training.
DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS:Three investigators independently conducted literature screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. The primary outcome focused on motor-evoked potentials as measured by TMS, with treatment effects quantified using mean differences or standardized mean differences between pre- and post-treatment. Subgroup analyses were conducted using mixed-effects models, while random-effects or fixed-effects models were used to estimate average treatment differences across studies.
RESULTS:Based on 34 studies involving 1031 adults, acupuncture techniques significantly enhanced CSE. EA had a greater impact than MA, with effect sizes of 0.53 mV vs 0.43 mV (95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.30, 0.76], P < 0.00001 vs 95% CI: [0.28, 0.59], P < 0.00001). The 5 most frequently used acupoints were LI4 (Hegu, 32 times), ST36 (Zusanli, 10 times), LI11 (Quchi, 7 times), TE5 (Waiguan, 6 times), and GB34 (Yanglingquan, 5 times).
CONCLUSION:This systematic review indicates that both EA and MA could effectively and safely enhance CSE, bringing the corticospinal pathway closer to the threshold for firing, which may ultimately improve motor function. LI4, ST36, LI11, TE5 and GB34 are the most commonly used acupoints. Please cite this article as: Liu R, Moe AAK, Liu W, Zoghi M, Jaberzadeh S. Does acupuncture at motor-related acupoints affect corticospinal excitability? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Integr Med. 2025; 23(2): 113-125.
