A Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Panax Ginseng on Menopausal Women’s Sexual Function

Objectives: An increase in life expectancy results in the aging population growth. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of ginseng that could be used as a herbal medicine in women with sexual dysfunction. Materials and Methods: The authors of this study searched Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, ProQuest, Google Scholar, and Persian databases without a time limitation until May 2018 and examined all the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared the effect of different types of ginseng on sexual function of menopausal women as compared to the placebo controls. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. The heterogeneity was determined using the I2 index. In addition, standardized mean difference (SMD) was used instead of mean differences (MD) and a random effect was reported instead of fixed effect in meta-analysis. Results: The eligibility criteria were found in five RCTs. All the included studies were placebo-controlled. Two trials had a parallel design while three studies used a crossover design. Although four trials indicated that ginseng significantly improved sexual function, they didn’t report any treatment effect compared to the placebo group. Based on the results of meta-analysis obtained from five studies including 531 women, there was no statistically significant effect of ginseng on female sexual dysfunction (FSD) compared to the placebo control group (SMD: 0.26; 95% CI: -0.26 to 0.76). Nonetheless, there was a considerable heterogeneity among the studies (I2 = 81%; P < 0.0001). Moreover, all the included studies assessed adverse events, but in three of the RCTs, there was no significant difference between the placebo and ginseng groups. Conclusions: The evidence regarding ginseng as a therapeutic agent for sexual dysfunction is unjustifiable. Rigorous studies seem warranted in this respect.

Download Full-text

Repurposing of drugs for Covid-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

10.1101/2020.06.07.20124677 ◽

2020 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Pinky Kotecha ◽

Alexander Light ◽

Enrico Checcucci ◽

Daniele Amparore ◽

Cristian Fiori ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Clinical Improvement ◽

Case Reports ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Series ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Significant Difference

AbstractObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the data currently available regarding the repurposing of different drugs for Covid-19 treatment. Participants with suspected or diagnosed Covid-19 will be included. The interventions being considered are drugs being repurposed, and comparators will include standard of care treatment or placebo.MethodsWe searched Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, clinical trial registration site in the UK(NIHR), Europe (clinicaltrialsregister.eu), US (ClinicalTrials.gov) and internationally (isrctn.com), and reviewed the reference lists of articles for eligible articles published up to April 22, 2020. All studies in English that evaluated the efficacy of the listed drugs were included. Cochrane RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tool were used to assess study quality. This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines. The protocol is available at PROSPERO (CRD42020180915).ResultsFrom 708 identified studies or clinical trials, 16 studies and 16 case reports met our eligibility criteria. Of these, 6 were randomized controlled trials (763 patients), 7 cohort studies (321 patients) and 3 case series (191 patients). Chloroquine (CQ) had a 100% discharge rate compared to 50% with lopinavir-ritonavir at day 14, however a trial has recommended against a high dosage due to cardiotoxic events. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has shown no significant improvement in negative seroconversion rate which is also seen in our meta-analysis (p=0.68). Adverse events with HCQ have a significant difference compared to the control group (p=0.001). Lopinavir-ritonavir has shown no improvement in time to clinical improvement which is seen in our meta-analyses (p=0.1). Remdesivir has shown no significant improvement in time to clinical improvement but this trial had insufficient power.DiscussionDue to the paucity in evidence, it is difficult to establish the efficacy of these drugs in the treatment of Covid-19 as currently there is no significant clinical effectiveness of the repurposed drugs. Further large clinical trials are required to achieve more reliable findings. A risk-benefit analysis is required on an individual basis to weigh out the potential improvement in clinical outcome and viral load reduction compared to the risks of the adverse events. (1-16)

Download Full-text

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Omalizumab in the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

American Journal of Rhinology and Allergy ◽

10.1177/1945892419884774 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 34 (2) ◽

pp. 196-208 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Chenjie Yu ◽

Kaijian Wang ◽

Xinyan Cui ◽

Ling Lu ◽

Jianfei Dong ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Allergic Rhinitis ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Symptom Score ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Life Questionnaire ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Symptom Scores

Background Patients with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis (AR) who are treated according to the current rhinitis management guidelines may be inadequately controlled. These patients are at risk of serious comorbidities, such as asthma and chronic sinusitis. These symptoms, sneezing and an itchy, runny, stuffy nose, may have a negative impact on patients’ daily functioning. Omalizumab is being developed as a new choice for the treatment of AR. We therefore undertook a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of AR. Methods We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE databases for randomized controlled studies on the treatment of AR with omalizumab. Our evaluation outcomes were symptom scores, medication efficacy, combined symptom and medication scores, and adverse events. We descriptively summarized and quantitatively synthesized original data to evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of AR by using Stata12.0 software for meta-analyses. Results The results of our meta-analysis showed that there were statistically significant differences between the omalizumab group and the control group in the following aspects: daily nasal symptom score (standardized mean difference [SMD] = –0.443, 95% confidence interval [CI]: –0.538 to –0.347, P < .001); daily ocular symptom score (SMD = –0.385, 95% CI: –0.5 to –0.269, P < .001); daily nasal medication symptom scores (SMD = –0.421, 95% CI: –0.591 to –0.251, P < .001); proportion of days of emergency drug use (risk ratio [RR] = 0.488, 95% CI: 0.307 to 0.788, P < .005); rhinoconjunctivitis-specific quality of life questionnaire (SMD = –0.286, 95% CI: –0.418 to –0.154, P < .001); and overall evaluation (RR = 1.435, 95% CI: 1.303–1.582, P < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in safety indicator: adverse events (RR = 1.026, 95% CI: 0.916–1.150, P = .655). Conclusion Omalizumab is effective and relatively safe in patients with AR; omalizumab used in conjunction with special immunotherapy has shown promising results, especially in reducing adverse events.

Download Full-text

Safety and Efficacy of Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences ◽

10.18433/jpps31870 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 24 ◽

pp. 237-245

Author(s):

Mohammad Tasavon Gholamhoseini ◽

Vahid Yazdi-Feyzabadi ◽

Reza Goudarzi ◽

Mohammad Hossein Mehrolhassani

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Clinical Improvement ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Qualitative Assessment ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Placebo Control ◽

Serious Adverse Events ◽

Safety And Efficacy ◽

Positive Effects

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of remdesivir in adult patients with COVID-19. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and medRxiv databases were searched using a search strategy tailored to each database. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) checklists were used for the studies' qualitative assessment. The outcomes studied were mortality, all adverse events, serious adverse events, and clinical improvement. The quantitative synthesis was conducted using fixed and random effects models in the CMA 2.2. Heterogeneity was tested using the I-squared (I2) measure. Results: In general, six studies, including five randomized controlled trials and one cohort study were found eligible. Comparison of the findings related to both groups receiving remdesivir (10-day remdesivir group) and placebo/control group showed that remdesivir treatment had no significant effect on mortality at day 14 of the treatment (RR=0.769; 95% CI :0.563-1.050; p=0.098), and all adverse events (RR= 1.078; 95% CI: 0.908-1.279; p= 0.392). However, remdesivir had a significant effect on clinical improvement at day 14 compared to placebo/control (OR= 1.447; 95% CI: 1.005-2.085; p= 0.047) and reduced serious adverse events (RR= 0.736; 95% CI: 0.611-0.887; p= 0.001). Conclusion: Remdesivir has positive effects on clinical improvement, and reduction of the risk of serious adverse events. However, it does not influence the mortality at day 14 of treatment.

Download Full-text

Abiraterone acetate (AA) or docetaxel (D) in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC): A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2018.36.6_suppl.243 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 36 (6_suppl) ◽

pp. 243-243

Author(s):

Irbaz Bin Riaz ◽

Abdulaali Almutairi ◽

Zeeshan Ali ◽

Abdullah Alhifany ◽

Sandipan Bhattacharjee ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Randomized Clinical Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Statistical Significance ◽

Random Effect ◽

Indirect Comparison ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Cochrane Central Register

243 Background: AA and D have been shown in separate trials to increase overall survival in patients with mCSPC compared to Androgen Derivation Therapy (ADT). In the absence of head to head clinical trials and to provide clinical guidance, we performed an indirect comparison of AA and D using network meta-analysis. Methods: We performed a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify relevant clinical trials. Collected data included hazard ratio and confidence interval (CI) for Overall Survival (OS) and number of adverse events in each study arm. Risk for bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using WinBUGS 1.4.3 software (MRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK) to perform an indirect comparison of D and AA. Results: Five clinical trials were included in this analysis. Two trials (LATITUDE, STAMPEDE) compared AA to ADT and three trials (CHAARTED,STAMPEDE, GETUG-AFU 15 study) compared D to ADT. Results from both fixed effect and random effect network meta-analyses for the primary outcome (OS) revealed no statistical significance between AA and D (HR 0.81,95%CI 0.65-1.01; HR 0.81, 95%CI 0.40-1.82) respectively. Comparatively, abiraterone had statistically significant fewer events of anemia (OR 0.14,95%CI 0.08-0.23), neutropenia (OR 0.06,95%CI 0.03-0.12), peripheral edema (OR 0.21,95%CI 0.09-0.44), dyspnea (OR 0.22,95%CI 0.08-0.51), nausea (OR 0.09,95%CI 0.02-0.24), diarrhea (OR 0.06,95%CI 0.02-0.15), constipation (OR 0.25,95%CI 0.11-0.53), and fatigue (OR 0.12,95%CI 0.07-0.20). AA had statistically significant more events of hot flashes (OR 3.85, 95% CI2.33-6.25). For other adverse events, both drugs were statistically similar. Conclusions: There is no difference in OS using AA for longer periods in CSPC than a regimen of a limited number of cycles of D. There are significant differences in side effect profile of these drugs. Further analyses are needed to determine cost effectiveness of AA vs D under consideration of comparative efficacy and safety.

Download Full-text

Vitamin E for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy: A meta-Analysis

Frontiers in Pharmacology ◽

10.3389/fphar.2021.684550 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

Author(s):

Jie Chen ◽

Haili Shan ◽

Wenjun Yang ◽

Jiali Zhang ◽

Haibin Dai ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Vitamin E ◽

Peripheral Neuropathy ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Random Effect ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Double Blind ◽

Standard Mean Difference ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Prophylactic Use

Background: Vitamin E has been increasingly used to prevent chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in recent years. However, it is still unclear whether vitamin E can effectively prevent CIPN.Methods: We searched all clinical studies in the Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, and PubMed databases from inception to December 2020. We performed a meta-analysis of 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 486 patients that compared the vitamin E group with the control group. Outcomes of the study were incidence of all-grade CIPN, incidence of severe CIPN, and the total neuropathy scores (TNS). Random effect models were used to make the meta-analysis results more cautious.Results: Notably, vitamin E significantly reduced the incidence of all-grade CIPN (overall risk ratio (RR) = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.36, 0.85, I2 = 77.3%, p = 0.007), and TNS (overall standard mean difference (SMD) = −0.64, 95% CI: −1.03, −0.25, I2 = 42.7%, p = 0.001). However, the results of the subgroup analysis, which included only double-blind RCTs, suggested that vitamin E did not significantly reduce the incidence of all-grade CIPN (overall RR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.07, 4.06, I2 = 77.5%, p = 0.531). Moreover, there was no significant difference in the incidence of severe CIPN between these two arms (p = 0.440).Conclusion: The results of our meta-analysis suggests that vitamin E has a beneficial effect on the incidence and symptoms of CIPN. However, routine prophylactic use of vitamin E is still not recommended. Moreover, more high-quality double-blind RCTs are needed to further validate the effects of vitamin E in prevention of CIPN.

Download Full-text

The Effects of Aromatherapy on Premenstrual Syndrome Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine ◽

10.1155/2020/6667078 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2020 ◽

pp. 1-13

Author(s):

Somayeh Es-haghee ◽

Fatemeh Shabani ◽

Jessie Hawkins ◽

Mohammad Ali Zareian ◽

Fatemeh Nejatbakhsh ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

Premenstrual Syndrome ◽

Randomized Clinical Trials ◽

Weighted Mean Difference ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Random Effect ◽

Random Effect Model ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Childbearing Age

ObjectivesPremenstrual syndrome (PMS) is a common disturbance among women of childbearing age. Aromatherapy is a commonly used form of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) to treat PMS. The purpose of this study is to quantify and summarize the effects of aromatherapy on premenstrual syndrome symptoms. Methods. PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were searched through relevant search terms until October 2020. The effect sizes were pooled as weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random effect model. Egger tests and visual inspection of the funnel plot were performed to identify the existence of publication bias. The I-squared (I2) test was applied to measure heterogeneity. Results. Eight studies (n = 8) were included in this analysis. The quantitative synthesis of evidence found that aromatherapy decreases PMS scores (WMD –13.83; 95% CI (−22.04, −5.63), I2 = 94.5%), total psychological symptoms of PMS (WMD –3.51; 95% CI (−4.84, −2.18), I2 = 82.6%), anxiety of PMS (WMD–1.78; 95% CI (−3.17, −0.38), I2 = 94.2%), depression of PMS (WMD–2.0; 95% CI (−3.65, −0.34), I2 = 93.7%), and fatigue of PMS (WMD – 1.44; 95% CI (−2.44, −0.44), I2 = 89.7%) compared to the control group. Conclusion. Aromatherapy is an effective tool for the relief of PMS symptoms. Additional randomized controlled clinical trials with different durations and essential oils should be conducted to confirm our findings.

Download Full-text

Safety of IL-23/17 Antagonists in Patients with Psoriasis or Other Immune-mediated Inflammatory Diseases: A Systematic Meta-Analysis.

10.21203/rs.3.rs-49001/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Siying Li ◽

Suhan Zhang ◽

Guishao Tang ◽

Ruifang Wu ◽

Yuwen Su

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Randomized Clinical Trials ◽

Inflammatory Diseases ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cardiovascular Disorder ◽

Control Group ◽

Placebo Control ◽

Serious Adverse Events ◽

Immune Mediated ◽

Increased Risk

Abstract Background: The IL-23/17 axis plays central role in the pathogenesis of several immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). IL-23/17 antagonists showed significant improvement in the treatment for psoriasis and other IMIDs, including psoriasis(PSO), psoriatic arthritis(PsA), rheumatoid arthritis(RA) and ankylosing spondylitis(AS).Objective: To assess the safety of IL-23/17 antagonists therapy on patients with psoriasis and other IMIDs.Methods: Pooled analysis from thirty-nine placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of IL-23/17 axis antagonists for IMIDs. Incidences of adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs) and AEs of interest were applied to evaluate the safety profile.Result: A Total of 15967 patients were exposed to IL-23/17 axis antagonists. The proportions of patients suffered at least one AE in antagonists group and placebo-control group are 67.5% and 51.1% respectively. Incidence of SAE was increased in patients treated with IL-23/17 axis antagonists compared to patients given placebo (relative risk 2.03; 95% CI, 1.62, 2.56). Incidence of AEs of interest were all increased in patients treated with IL-23/17 axis antagonists compared to patients given placebo.Conclusion: In this analysis, we found increased risk of AEs, SAEs, nervous system disorder, cardiovascular disorder and hypertension among patients with IMIDs treated with IL-23/17 axis antagonists.

Download Full-text

Laser Influence on Dental Sensitivity Compared to Other Light Sources Used During In-office Dental Bleaching: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Operative Dentistry ◽

10.2341/19-064-l ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 45 (6) ◽

pp. 589-597

Author(s):

BGS Casado ◽

EP Pellizzer ◽

JR Souto Maior ◽

CAA Lemos ◽

BCE Vasconcelos ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Randomized Clinical Trials ◽

Color Change ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Present Review ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Light Sources ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Tooth Color ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Meta Analyses

Clinical Relevance The use of laser light during bleaching will not reduce the incidence or severity of sensitivity and will not increase the degree of color change compared with nonlaser light sources. SUMMARY Objective: To evaluate whether the use of laser during in-office bleaching promotes a reduction in dental sensitivity after bleaching compared with other light sources. Methods: The present review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and is registered with PROSPERO (CDR42018096591). Searches were conducted in the PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for relevant articles published up to August 2018. Only randomized clinical trials among adults that compared the use of laser during in-office whitening and other light sources were considered eligible. Results: After analysis of the texts retrieved during the database search, six articles met the eligibility criteria and were selected for the present review. For the outcome dental sensitivity, no significant difference was found favoring any type of light either for intensity (mean difference [MD]: −1.60; confidence interval [CI]: −3.42 to 0.22; p=0.09) or incidence (MD: 1.00; CI: 0.755 to 1.33; p=1.00). Regarding change in tooth color, no significant differences were found between the use of the laser and other light sources (MD: −2.22; CI: −6.36 to 1.93; p=0.29). Conclusions: Within the limitations of the present study, laser exerts no influence on tooth sensitivity compared with other light sources when used during in-office bleaching. The included studies demonstrated that laser use during in-office bleaching may have no influence on tooth color change.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Non-Steroidal Anti-Androgens in Patients with Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Reviews on Recent Clinical Trials ◽

10.2174/1574887114666191105152404 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 15 (1) ◽

pp. 34-47 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Muhammed Rashid ◽

Madhan Ramesh ◽

K. Shamshavali ◽

Amit Dang ◽

Himanshu Patel ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Prostate Cancer ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Quality Assessment ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Significant Difference

Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the sixth primary cause of cancer death. However, conflicts are present about the efficacy and safety of Non-steroidal anti-androgens (NSAA) for its treatment. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of NSAAs versus any comparator for the treatment of advanced or metastatic PCa (mPCa). Methodology: MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library were searched. References of included studies and clinicaltrials.gov were also searched for relevant studies. Only English language studies after 1990 were considered for review. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy and safety of NSAAs as compared with any other comparator including surgery or chemotherapy in mPCa patients were included. The outcomes include efficacy, safety and the tolerability of the treatment. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used for quality assessment. Two authors were independently involved in the selection, extraction and quality assessment of included studies and disagreements were resolved by discussion or by consulting a third reviewer. Results: Fifty-eight out of 1307 non-duplicate RCTs with 29154 patients were considered for the review. NSAA showed significantly better progression-free survival [PFS] (Hazard ratio [HR], 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.78; P=0.0001), time to distant metastasis or death [TTD] (HR, 0.80; 95% CI 0.73-0.91; p<0.0001), objective response (Odds ratio [OR], 1.64; 95% CI 1.06-2.54; P=0.03) and clinical benefits (OR, 1.33; 95% CI 1.08-1.63; P=0.006) as compared to the control group. There was no significant difference observed between the groups in terms of overall survival (HR, 0.95; 95%CI, 0.87-1.03; P=0.18) and time to progression (HR, 0.93; 95% CI 0.77-1.11; P=0.43). Treatment-related adverse events were more with the NSAA group, but the discontinuation due to lack of efficacy reason was 43% significantly lesser than the control group in patients with mPCa. Rest of the outcomes were appeared to be non-significant. Conclusion: Treatment with NSAA was appeared to be better efficacious with respect to PFS, TTD, and response rate with considerable adverse events when compared to the control group in patients with metastatic PCa.

Download Full-text

Acupuncture for post-stroke depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies ◽

10.1186/s12906-021-03277-3 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Ran Liu ◽

Kun Zhang ◽

Qiu-yu Tong ◽

Guang-wei Cui ◽

Wen Ma ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Randomized Clinical Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Quality Of Evidence ◽

Post Stroke ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Post Stroke Depression ◽

Meta Analyses

Abstract Background Acupuncture for post-stroke depression (PSD) has been evolving, but uncertainty remains. To assess the existing evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of acupuncture for PSD, we sought to draw conclusions by synthesizing RCTs. Methods An exhaustive literature search was conducted in seven electronic databases from their inception dates to April 19, 2020, to identify systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) on this topic. The primary RCTs included in the SRs/MAs were identified. We also conducted a supplementary search for RCTs published from January 1, 2015, to May 12, 2020. Two reviewers extracted data separately and pooled data using RevMan 5.3 software. The quality of evidence was critically appraised with the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Results A total of 17 RCTs involving 1402 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that participants who received a combination of acupuncture and conventional treatments exhibited significantly lower scores on the HAM-D17, HAM-D24 and HAM-D (MD, − 5.08 [95% CI, − 6.48 to − 3.67], I2 = 0%), (MD, − 9.72 [95% CI, − 14.54 to − 4.91], I2 = 65%) and (MD, − 2.72 [95% CI, − 3.61 to − 1.82], respectively) than those who received conventional treatment. However, there was no significant difference in acupuncture versus antidepressants in terms of the 17-item, 24-item and HAM-D scales (MD, − 0.43 [95% CI, − 1.61 to 0.75], I2 = 51%), (MD, − 3.09 [95% CI, − 10.81 to 4.63], I2 = 90%) and (MD, − 1.55 [95% CI, − 4.36 to 1.26], I2 = 95%, respectively). For adverse events, acupuncture was associated with fewer adverse events than antidepressants (RR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.39], I2 = 35%), but there was no significant difference in the occurrence of adverse events between the combination of acupuncture and conventional treatments versus conventional treatments (RR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.21 to 1.83], I2 = 38%). The quality of evidence was low to very low due to the substantial heterogeneity among the included studies. Conclusions The current review indicates that acupuncture has greater effect on PSD and better safety profile than antidepressants, but high-quality evidence evaluating acupuncture for PSD is still needed.

Download Full-text