SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
Transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation for preventing postoperative delirium in elderly patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically evaluate the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) in preventing postoperative delirium (POD) in elderly patients undergoing various surgical procedures. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple electronic databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TEAS with control interventions (sham or no stimulation) in patients aged >60 years undergoing surgery. The primary outcome was the incidence of POD within the first seven postoperative days. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software, calculating risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD), or standard MD with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The quality of evidence was assessed based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Results: Twenty RCTs involving 2,290 patients (aged >60 years) were included. The overall incidence of POD was 5.6% in the TEAS group compared to 17.0% in the control group (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.26-0.45). TEAS also significantly reduced CAM score (MD -1.01, 95% CI -1.98 to -0.04), propofol consumption (MD -35.59 mg, 95% CI -65.75 to -5.42), postoperative pain score (MD -0.60, 95% CI -1.02 to -0.18), and improved recovery quality (QoR-15 score: MD 23.76, 95% CI 21.72-25.80). The intervention appeared safe with no serious adverse events reported. Conclusion: Perioperative TEAS application significantly reduces the risk of POD in elderly surgical patients. Its protective effects are potentially mediated through anti-inflammatory effects. TEAS represents a promising non-pharmacological intervention for POD prevention within enhanced recovery protocols. Systematic review registration: CRD420251128976.
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.