Abstract

To analyze the effect of acupuncture versus hormone replacement therapy (HRT) for premature ovarian insufficiency (POI). China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Academic Journal Full-text Database (Wanfang), Chongqing VIP Database (CQVIP), China Biology Medicine Disc (CBM), Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE) were searched up to January 31st, 2019 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of acupuncture for POI. The primary outcome was the level of basal serum follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH). Secondary outcomes included serum levels of luteinizing hormone (LH), estradiol (E2) and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH). Two authors extracted data independently and assessed the risk of bias and the methodological quality using the Cochrane’s tool. Meta-analysis was conducted by RevMan version 5.3. Eight eligible RCTs with a total of 496 POI patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that there was a significant reduction in the basal serum FSH level (MD=−5.82, 95%CI: −9.76 to −1.87, I2=82%, P=0.004) and a remarkable elevation in the basal E2 level (SMD=0.93, 95%CI: 0.34 to 1.52, I2=88%, P=0.002) in the acupuncture group when compared with the control. Subgroup analysis showed that compared with HRT, a significant decrease in the FSH level was observed in both acupuncture alone (MD=−4.53, 95%CI: −8.96 to −0.10, I2=73%, P=0.04) and acupuncture plus HRT (MD=−9.60, 95%CI: −17.60 to −1.61, I2=50%, P=0.02), while a remarkable elevation of E2 was only found in acupuncture plus HRT (SMD=1.43, 95%CI: 1.03 to 1.82, I2=0%, P<0.00001). There was no significant difference in the LH level between acupuncture and HRT (MD=−3.16, 95%CI: −9.41 to 3.10, I2=0%, P=0.32), only one trial reported AMH, and no significant difference was found between acupuncture and HRT. The present study indicated that acupuncture had an advantage over HRT in reducing serum FSH level and increasing serum E2 level in women with POI. However, evidence supporting the finding is limited due to the small sample size, potential methodological flaws and significant heterogeneity. Hence, this conclusion still needs to be verified by high-quality RCTs.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.