SynthesisMedicine2022
Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of acupoint catgut embedding in the treatment of ulcerative colitis: Acupoint catgut embedding treating ulcerative colitis meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative clinical efficacy of acupuncture-related therapies for ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Acupoint Catgut Embedding Ameliorates Ulcerative Colitis in Association with Modulation of cGAS-STING Signaling and M1-Like/M2-Like Macrophage Markers.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory measures have delayed the progression of ulcerative colitis (UC) to a certain extent, the adverse drug reactions and recurrence after recovery still trouble clinicians. Acupoint catgut embedding is a possible alternative strategy for the treatment of UC, but its clinical efficacy remains controversial. Therefore, this study systematically evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of acupoint catgut embedding compared with conventional western medicine in the treatment of UC.
methodsVIP, Wanfang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biology Medicine, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library databases were searched. And the publication time of the literature was limited from the time that the database was established to February 2022. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias as required. Meta-analysis was performed with Revman 5.3. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed with TSA 0.9.5.10 Beta. Publication bias was assessed by Stata 15.0. And evidence quality was appraised with GRADEpro3.6.
resultsA total of 10 studies were listed, with a total sample size of 782 cases. Meta-analysis showed that compared with conventional western medicine, acupoint catgut embedding can effectively improve the total effective rate of clinical symptoms (relative risk [RR] = 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.09,1.24], P < .00001), endoscopic total effective rate (RR = 1.16, 95%CI = [1.08,1.25], P < .0001), clinical symptom cure rate (RR = 1.80, 95%CI = [1.37,2.38], P < .0001), and endoscopic cure rate (RR = 1.97, 95%CI = [1.36,2.86], P = .0004) of UC, but the adverse event rate (RR = 0.20, 95%CI = [0.01,4.00], P = .29) was similar. Trial sequential analysis indicated that the efficacy endpoint was conclusive. Harbord test confirmed no significant publication bias. The quality of evidence for these outcomes ranges from low to medium.
conclusionThe clinical efficacy of acupoint catgut embedding in the treatment of UC is superior to that of conventional western medicine, and the safety may be equivalent to that of conventional western medicine, which has the value of further research and exploration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.