Acupuncture for allergic rhinitis：a systematic review and meta analysis / 针灸推拿医学（英文版）

ABSTRACT

Objective: To analyze and review the clinical efficacy of acupuncture (including electroacupuncture) alone for allergic rhinitis (AR) and to compare its efficacy with antihistamines and Chinese patent medicineBi Yan Kang Tablet. Methods: The search strategy, inclusion and exclusion criteria were made according to the principle of evidence-based medicine. We performed a systematic search on China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Academic Journal Full-text Database (Wanfang), Chongqing VIP Database (CQVIP), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture for allergic rhinitis between January 1990 and December 2015. The quality was evaluated by Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1, and the meta-analysis was conducted by RevMan 5.3 version. Results: Twenty eligible RCTs were included into the meta-analysis after selection. Compared with antihistamines, the meta-analysis showed RR=1.24>1, 95%CI[1.15, 1.33],P0, 95%CI[–10.84, 13.75],P=0.82, indicating that there was no statistical difference between acupuncture and antihistamines in regulating immunoglobulin E (IgE) in AR patients. Compared withBi Yan Kang Tablet, the meta-analysis has shown RR=1.50>1, 95%CI[1.30, 1.73],P<0.00001, indicating that acupuncture achieved a better total effective rate for AR than Chinese patent medicineBi Yan KangTablet. Conclusion: Acupuncture alone can achieve a better total effective rate for AR than antihistamines andBi Yan Kang Tablet. It is also better than antihistamines in improving clinical symptom scores; however, whether acupuncture is better thanBi Yan KangTablet needs further proof. As far as current data are concerned, there was no statistical difference between acupuncture and antihistamines in improving serum IgE; further study is needed in this regard. The risk of bias due to absent randomization methods or blinding implementation decreased the evidence level of the overall conclusion.