-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022Functional constipation is defined as chronic constipation with no identifiable underlying cause. It is a significant cause of morbidity in children, accounting for up... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Functional constipation is defined as chronic constipation with no identifiable underlying cause. It is a significant cause of morbidity in children, accounting for up to 25% of visits to paediatric gastroenterologists. Probiotic preparations may sufficiently alter the gut microbiome and promote normal gut physiology in a way that helps relieve functional constipation. Several studies have sought to address this hypothesis, as well as the role of probiotics in other functional gut disorders. Therefore, it is important to have a focused review to assess the evidence to date.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of probiotics for the management of chronic constipation without a physical explanation in children.
SEARCH METHODS
On 28 June 2021, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, WHO ICTR, and ClinicalTrials.gov, with no language, date, publication status, or document type limitations.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed probiotic preparations (including synbiotics) compared to placebo, no treatment or any other interventional preparation in people aged between 0 and 18 years old with a diagnosis of functional constipation according to consensus criteria (such as Rome IV).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 14 studies (1127 randomised participants): 12 studies assessed probiotics in the treatment of functional constipation, whilst two studies investigated synbiotic preparations. Three studies compared probiotics to placebo in relation to the frequency of defecation at study end, but we did not pool them as there was very significant unexplained heterogeneity. Four studies compared probiotics to placebo in relation to treatment success. There may be no difference in global improvement/treatment success (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.26; 313 participants; low-certainty evidence). Five studies compared probiotics to placebo in relation to withdrawals due to adverse events, with the pooled effect suggesting there may be no difference (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.95; 357 participants; low-certainty evidence). The pooled estimate from three studies that compared probiotics plus an osmotic laxative to osmotic laxative alone found there may be no difference in frequency of defecation (MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.56; 268 participants; low-certainty evidence). Two studies compared probiotics plus an osmotic laxative to osmotic laxative alone in relation to global improvement/treatment success, and found there may be no difference between the treatments (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.15; 139 participants; low-certainty evidence). Three studies compared probiotics plus osmotic laxative to osmotic laxative alone in relation to withdrawals due to adverse events, but it is unclear if there is a difference between them (RR 2.86, 95% CI 0.12 to 68.35; 268 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Two studies compared probiotics versus magnesium oxide. It is unclear if there is a difference in frequency of defecation (MD 0.28, 95% CI -0.58 to 1.14; 36 participants), treatment success (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.57; 36 participants) or withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.04; 77 participants). The certainty of the evidence is very low for these outcomes. One study assessed the role of a synbiotic preparation in comparison to placebo. There may be higher treatment success in favour of synbiotics compared to placebo (RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.54 to 3.47; 155 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study reported that there were no withdrawals due to adverse effects in either group. One study assessed a synbiotic plus paraffin compared to paraffin alone. It is uncertain if there is a difference in frequency of defecation (MD 0.74, 95% CI -0.96, 2.44; 66 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or treatment success (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.17; 66 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study reported that there were no withdrawals due to adverse effects in either group. One study compared a synbiotic preparation to paraffin. It is uncertain if there is a difference in frequency of defecation (MD -1.53, 95% CI -3.00, -0.06; 60 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or in treatment success (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.65, 1.13; 60 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study reported that there were no withdrawals due to adverse effects in either group. All secondary outcomes were either not reported or reported in a way that did not allow for analysis.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to conclude whether probiotics are efficacious in successfully treating chronic constipation without a physical explanation in children or changing the frequency of defecation, or whether there is a difference in withdrawals due to adverse events when compared with placebo. There is limited evidence from one study to suggest a synbiotic preparation may be more likely than placebo to lead to treatment success, with no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events. There is insufficient evidence to draw efficacy or safety conclusions about the use of probiotics in combination with or in comparison to any of the other interventions reported. The majority of the studies that presented data on serious adverse events reported that no events occurred. Two studies did not report this outcome. Future studies are needed to confirm efficacy, but the research community requires guidance on the best context for probiotics in such studies, considering where they should be best considered in a potential treatment hierarchy and should align with core outcome sets to support future interpretation of findings.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Child, Preschool; Constipation; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Probiotics; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35349168
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014257.pub2 -
Gut Sep 2017To compare efficacy of pharmacotherapies for chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) based on comparisons to placebo using Bayesian network meta-analysis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To compare efficacy of pharmacotherapies for chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) based on comparisons to placebo using Bayesian network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
We conducted searches (inception to May 2015) of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane Central, as well as original data from authors or drug companies for the medications used for CIC.
STUDY SELECTION
Phase IIB and phase III randomised, placebo-controlled trials (RCT) of ≥4 weeks' treatment for CIC in adults with Rome II or III criteria for functional constipation; trials included at least one of four end points.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two investigators independently evaluated all full-text articles that met inclusion criteria and extracted data for primary and secondary end points, risk of bias and quality of evidence.
OUTCOMES
Primary end points were ≥3 complete spontaneous bowel movements (CSBM)/week and increase over baseline by ≥1 CSBM/week. Secondary end points were change from baseline (Δ) in the number of SBM/week and Δ CSBM/week.
RESULTS
Twenty-one RCTs (9189 patients) met inclusion and end point criteria: 9 prucalopride, 3 lubiprostone, 3 linaclotide, 2 tegaserod, 1 each velusetrag, elobixibat, bisacodyl and sodium picosulphate (NaP). All prespecified end points were unavailable in four polyethylene glycol studies. Bisacodyl, NaP, prucalopride and velusetrag were superior to placebo for the ≥3 CSBM/week end point. No drug was superior at improving the primary end points on network meta-analysis. Bisacodyl appeared superior to the other drugs for the secondary end point, Δ in number of SBM/week.
CONCLUSIONS
Current drugs for CIC show similar efficacy. Bisacodyl may be superior to prescription medications for Δ in the number of SBM/week in CIC.
Topics: Azabicyclo Compounds; Benzofurans; Bisacodyl; Chronic Disease; Citrates; Constipation; Defecation; Drug Monitoring; Gastrointestinal Agents; Humans; Organometallic Compounds; Picolines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27287486
DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2016-311835 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2016Constipation within childhood is an extremely common problem. Despite the widespread use of osmotic and stimulant laxatives by health professionals to manage... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Constipation within childhood is an extremely common problem. Despite the widespread use of osmotic and stimulant laxatives by health professionals to manage constipation in children, there has been a long standing paucity of high quality evidence to support this practice.
OBJECTIVES
We set out to evaluate the efficacy and safety of osmotic and stimulant laxatives used to treat functional childhood constipation.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Trials Register from inception to 10 March 2016. There were no language restrictions. We also searched the references of all included studies, personal contacts and drug companies to identify studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared osmotic or stimulant laxatives to placebo or another intervention, with participants aged 0 to 18 years old were considered for inclusion. The primary outcome was frequency of defecation. Secondary endpoints included faecal incontinence, disimpaction, need for additional therapies and adverse events.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Relevant papers were identified and two authors independently assessed the eligibility of trials, extracted data and assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome was frequency of defecation. Secondary endpoints included faecal incontinence, disimpaction, need for additional therapies and adverse events. For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) using a fixed-effect model. For dichotomous outcomes we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI using a fixed-effect model. The Chi(2) and I(2) statistics were used to assess statistical heterogeneity. A random-effects model was used in situations of unexplained heterogeneity. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary and secondary outcomes using the GRADE criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-five RCTs (2310 participants) were included in the review. Fourteen studies were judged to be at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding, incomplete outcome data and selective reporting. Meta-analysis of two studies (101 patients) comparing polyethylene glycol (PEG) with placebo showed a significantly increased number of stools per week with PEG (MD 2.61 stools per week, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.08). Common adverse events in the placebo-controlled studies included flatulence, abdominal pain, nausea, diarrhoea and headache. Participants receiving high dose PEG (0.7 g/kg) had significantly more stools per week than low dose PEG (0.3 g/kg) participants (1 study, 90 participants, MD 1.30, 95% 0.76 to 1.84). Meta-analysis of 6 studies with 465 participants comparing PEG with lactulose showed a significantly greater number of stools per week with PEG (MD 0.70 , 95% CI 0.10 to 1.31), although follow-up was short. Patients who received PEG were significantly less likely to require additional laxative therapies. Eighteen per cent (27/154) of PEG patients required additional therapies compared to 31% (47/150) of lactulose patients (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.83). No serious adverse events were reported with either agent. Common adverse events in these studies included diarrhoea, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting and pruritis ani. Meta-analysis of 3 studies with 211 participants comparing PEG with milk of magnesia showed that the stools per week were significantly greater with PEG (MD 0.69, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.89). However, the magnitude of this difference was quite small and may not be clinically significant. One child was noted to be allergic to PEG, but there were no other serious adverse events reported. One study found a significant difference in stools per week favouring milk of magnesia over lactulose (MD -1.51, 95% CI -2.63 to -0.39, 50 patients), Meta-analysis of 2 studies with 287 patients comparing liquid paraffin (mineral oil) with lactulose revealed a relatively large statistically significant difference in the number of stools per week favouring liquid paraffin (MD 4.94 , 95% CI 4.28 to 5.61). No serious adverse events were reported. Adverse events included abdominal pain, distention and watery stools. No statistically significant differences in the number of stools per week were found between PEG and enemas (1 study, 90 patients, MD 1.00, 95% CI -1.58 to 3.58), dietary fibre mix and lactulose (1 study, 125 patients, P = 0.481), senna and lactulose (1 study, 21 patients, P > 0.05), lactitol and lactulose (1 study, 51 patients, MD -0.80, 95% CI -2.63 to 1.03), hydrolyzed guar gum and lactulose (1 study, 61 patients, MD 1.00, 95% CI -1.80 to 3.80), PEG and flixweed (1 study, 109 patients, MD 0.00, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.33), PEG and dietary fibre (1 study, 83 patients, MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.64 to 1.04), and PEG and liquid paraffin (2 studies, 261 patients, MD 0.35, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.95).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The pooled analyses suggest that PEG preparations may be superior to placebo, lactulose and milk of magnesia for childhood constipation. GRADE analyses indicated that the overall quality of the evidence for the primary outcome (number of stools per week) was low or very low due to sparse data, inconsistency (heterogeneity), and high risk of bias in the studies in the pooled analyses. Thus, the results of the pooled analyses should be interpreted with caution because of quality and methodological concerns, as well as clinical heterogeneity, and short follow-up. There is also evidence suggesting the efficacy of liquid paraffin (mineral oil). There is no evidence to demonstrate the superiority of lactulose when compared to the other agents studied, although there is a lack of placebo controlled studies. Further research is needed to investigate the long term use of PEG for childhood constipation, as well as the role of liquid paraffin. The optimal dose of PEG also warrants further investigation.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Child, Preschool; Constipation; Defecation; Dietary Fiber; Enema; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Lactulose; Laxatives; Magnesium Hydroxide; Male; Mineral Oil; Osmosis; Polyethylene Glycols; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Senna Extract; Sennosides; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27531591
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009118.pub3 -
The American Journal of Clinical... Sep 2020Progress has been made worldwide in reducing chronic undernutrition and rates of linear growth stunting in children under 5 y of age, although rates still remain high in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Progress has been made worldwide in reducing chronic undernutrition and rates of linear growth stunting in children under 5 y of age, although rates still remain high in many regions. Policies, programs, and interventions supporting maternal and child health and nutrition have the potential to improve child growth and development.
OBJECTIVE
This article synthesizes the available global evidence on the drivers of national declines in stunting prevalence and compares the relative effect of major drivers of stunting decline between countries.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of published peer-reviewed and gray literature analyzing the relation between changes in key determinants of child linear growth and contemporaneous changes in linear growth outcomes over time.
RESULTS
Among the basic determinants of stunting assessed within regression-decomposition analyses, improvement in asset index score was a consistent and strong driver of improved linear growth outcomes. Increased parental education was also a strong predictor of improved child growth. Of the underlying determinants of stunting, reduced rates of open defecation, improved sanitation infrastructure, and improved access to key maternal health services, including optimal antenatal care and delivery in a health facility or with a skilled birth attendant, all accounted for substantially improved child growth, although the magnitude of variation explained by each differed substantially between countries. At the immediate level, changes in several maternal characteristics predicted modest stunting reductions, including parity, interpregnancy interval, and maternal height.
CONCLUSIONS
Unique sets of stunting determinants predicted stunting reduction within countries that have reduced stunting. Several common drivers emerge at the basic, underlying, and immediate levels, including improvements in maternal and paternal education, household socioeconomic status, sanitation conditions, maternal health services access, and family planning. Further data collection and in-depth mixed-methods research are required to strengthen recommendations for those countries where the stunting burden remains unacceptably high.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Child Development; Child Health; Child, Preschool; Female; Growth Disorders; Humans; Male; Nutritional Status
PubMed: 32860401
DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/nqaa159 -
Digestive Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) 2021Chronic diarrhea is defined as more than 3 bowel movements per day, or loose stools, or stool weight >200 g/day for at least 4 weeks. Accompanying symptoms may include...
BACKGROUND
Chronic diarrhea is defined as more than 3 bowel movements per day, or loose stools, or stool weight >200 g/day for at least 4 weeks. Accompanying symptoms may include urgency, abdominal pain, or cramps.
SUMMARY
A number of causes have to be considered, including inflammatory, neoplastic, malabsorptive, infective, vascular, and functional gastrointestinal diseases. Other causes include food intolerances, side effects of drugs, or postsurgical conditions. Diarrhea may also be symptom of a systemic disease, like diabetes or hyperthyroidism. Special patient groups, like the very elderly and immunocompromised patients, pose special challenges. This review follows a question-answer style and addresses questions raised on the intersection of primary and secondary care. What do you mean by diarrhea? Why is it important to distinguish between acute or chronic diarrhea? How shall the patient with chronic diarrhea be approached? How can history and physical exam help? How can routine laboratory tests help in categorizing diarrhea? Which additional laboratory tests may be helpful? How to proceed in undiagnosed or intractable diarrhea? What are the treatment options in patients with chronic diarrhea? Key Messages: Acute diarrhea is usually of infectious origin with the main treatment goal of preventing water and electrolyte disturbances. Chronic diarrhea is usually not of infectious origin and may be the symptom of a large number of gastrointestinal and general diseases or drug side effects. In undiagnosed or intractable diarrhea, the question shall be raised whether the appropriate tests have been performed and interpreted correctly.
Topics: Aged; Chronic Disease; Defecation; Diarrhea; Feces; Gastroenterologists; Humans; Primary Health Care
PubMed: 33588424
DOI: 10.1159/000515219 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Nov 2014Anal fissures are a common cause of anal pain during, and for 1 to 2 hours after, defecation. The cause is not fully understood, but low intake of dietary fibre may be a... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Anal fissures are a common cause of anal pain during, and for 1 to 2 hours after, defecation. The cause is not fully understood, but low intake of dietary fibre may be a risk factor.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of surgical treatments for chronic anal fissure? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to January 2014 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found nine studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: anal advancement flap, anal stretch/dilation, and internal anal sphincterotomy.
Topics: Anal Canal; Fissure in Ano; Humans; Risk Factors; United States
PubMed: 25391392
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery :... Nov 2020Chewing gum as a form of sham feeding is an inexpensive and well-tolerated means of promoting gastrointestinal motility following major abdominal surgery. Although... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chewing gum as a form of sham feeding is an inexpensive and well-tolerated means of promoting gastrointestinal motility following major abdominal surgery. Although recognised by the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society as one of the multimodal approaches to expedite recovery after surgery, strong evidence to support its use in routine postoperative practice is lacking.
METHODOLOGY
A comprehensive literature review of all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was performed in the Medline and Embase databases between 2000 and 2019. Studies were selected to compare the use of chewing gum versus standard care in the management of postoperative ileus (POI) in adults undergoing colorectal surgery. The primary outcome assessed was the incidence of POI. Secondary outcomes included time to passage of flatus, time to defecation, total length of hospital stay and mortality.
RESULTS
Sixteen RCTs were included in the systematic review, of which ten (970 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The incidence of POI was significantly reduced in patients utilising chewing gum compared to those having standard care (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39, 0.79, p = 0.0009). These patients also had a significant reduction in time to passage of flatus (WMD - 0.31, 95% CI - 0.36, - 0.26, p < 0.00001) and time to defecation (WMD - 0.47, 95% CI - 0.60, - 0.34, p < 0.00001), without significant differences in the total length of hospital stay or mortality.
CONCLUSION
The use of chewing gum after colorectal surgery is a safe and effective intervention in reducing the incidence of POI and merits routine use alongside other ERAS pathways in the postoperative setting.
Topics: Abdomen; Adult; Chewing Gum; Colorectal Surgery; Gastrointestinal Motility; Humans; Ileus; Length of Stay; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 32103455
DOI: 10.1007/s11605-019-04507-3 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Apr 2010Prevalence of childhood constipation has been estimated at 0.7% to 29.6% in the general population worldwide; most children have no obvious aetiological factors. One... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Prevalence of childhood constipation has been estimated at 0.7% to 29.6% in the general population worldwide; most children have no obvious aetiological factors. One third of children with chronic constipation continue to have problems beyond puberty. Half of children with chronic faecal impaction and faecal incontinence have experienced an episode of painful defecation, and many children with chronic constipation exhibit withholding behaviour.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments for children with chronic constipation? What are the effects of treatments for clearing the bowel in children with faecal impaction? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to August 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 14 systematic reviews and RCTs that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: anal dilatation, behavioural treatments (biofeedback, diaries, or toilet training), bulk-forming laxatives, enemas, faecal softeners, fibre, macrogols, oral fluids, osmotic laxatives, prebiotics, probiotics, stimulant laxatives, and surgical disimpaction.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Child; Constipation; Fecal Incontinence; Humans; Laxatives; Polyethylene Glycols; Sexual Maturation
PubMed: 21718570
DOI: No ID Found -
Neurogastroenterology and Motility Nov 2021Chronic constipation is a common condition, and dyssynergic defecation underlies up to 40% of cases. Anorectal manometry is recommended to assess for dyssynergic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chronic constipation is a common condition, and dyssynergic defecation underlies up to 40% of cases. Anorectal manometry is recommended to assess for dyssynergic defecation among chronically constipated patients but remains poorly standardized. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of anorectal manometry and determine optimal testing parameters.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy including cohort studies of chronically constipated patients and case-control studies of patients with dyssynergic defecation or healthy controls. Meta-analysis was performed to determine summary sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
KEY RESULTS
A total of 15 studies comprising 2140 patients were included. Including all studies (estimating optimal diagnostic accuracy), the AUC was 0.78 [95% CI 0.72-0.82], summary sensitivity was 79% [61%-90%], and summary specificity was 64% [44%-79%] to diagnose dyssynergic defecation. In cohort studies only (estimating real-world diagnostic accuracy), the AUC was 0.72 [0.66-0.77], summary sensitivity was 86% [64%-95%], and summary specificity was 49% [30%-68%]. Employing three consecutive simulated defecation attempts improved sensitivity to 94%. A fourth simulated defecation maneuver with air insufflation may improve accuracy. Measuring anorectal pressures to identify complex dyssynergic patterns did not improve real-world diagnostic accuracy estimates over anal pressure measurement alone. Choice of manometry system did not impact diagnostic accuracy.
CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES
Following the current iteration of the London consensus protocol (three simulated defecation attempts measuring anal relaxation), the role of anorectal manometry in evaluating dyssynergic defecation appears limited. Future iterations of this protocol may improve diagnostic accuracy.
Topics: Ataxia; Constipation; Defecation; Defecography; Humans; Manometry; Rectal Diseases; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 33772969
DOI: 10.1111/nmo.14137 -
International Journal of Colorectal... Jul 2023Secondary constipation refers to constipation that occurs after certain diseases or medications, such as acute stroke or opioids, and the efficacy of electroacupuncture... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Secondary constipation refers to constipation that occurs after certain diseases or medications, such as acute stroke or opioids, and the efficacy of electroacupuncture for secondary constipation is controversial. So, this study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of electroacupuncture for secondary constipation through a meta-analysis and systematic review.
METHOD
We retrieved articles from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases up to 28 February 2023. The study was screened strictly according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Revman5.4 was used for quality evaluation; grade rating was used for index evaluation, and stata15.0 was used for data consolidation analysis.
RESULT
Thirteen randomized controlled studies, involving a total of 1437 people (722 electroacupuncture and 715 control groups), were included in this review. Meta-analysis results indicated that electroacupuncture significantly improved constipation overall response (RR = 1.31, 95%CI: 1.11, 1.55, P < 0.001), reduced defecation straining score (MD = - 0.46, 95%CI: - 0.67, - 0.251, P < 0.001), increased weekly complete spontaneous bowel movements (MD = 0.41, 95%CI: 0.20, 0.63, P = 0.002), and increased in the weekly spontaneous bowel movements (MD = 0.80, 95%CI (0.49, 01.11), P < 0.001), and electroacupuncture had no effect on change stool consistency score compared (MD = - 0.03, 95%CI (- 0.38, 0.33), P = 0.88) and did not increase adverse events (RR = 0.50, 95%CI: 0.18, 1.44, P = 0.20).
CONCLUSION
According to the current studies, the overall relief rate of patients with secondary constipation after electroacupuncture treatment was improved, the defecation pressure score was reduced, the weekly natural defecation was more complete, and adverse reactions were not increased. Electroacupuncture therefore shows potential for treating constipation, but more high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Topics: Humans; Electroacupuncture; Defecation; Constipation; Research Design; Control Groups
PubMed: 37452920
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-023-04487-6