SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
Efficacy and safety of acupuncture therapy for chronic spontaneous urticaria: a network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a common refractory skin disorder impairing quality of life. This study systematically evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of acupuncture therapies for CSU, providing evidence for clinical decision-making. Methods: Eight databases-CNKI, VIP, WanFang, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science-were searched from their inception to 31 July 2025, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating various acupuncture therapies for CSU. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool. Data analysis was performed using R4.4.2 and Stata 18. This study was registered in PROSPERO (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024608056). Results: Ninety-three RCTs involving 7,746 patients were included. Based on surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) analysis, acupuncture combined with autohemotherapy ranked first in improving efficacy [SUCRA = 92.79%, relative risk (RR) = 1.46, 95% credible interval (CrI): 1.19, 1.84]. Moxibustion ranked first in reducing the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score [SUCRA = 99.94%, mean difference (MD) = -9.45, 95% CrI: -12.48, -6.44]. In terms of wheal count, most pairwise comparisons among interventions showed no significant differences, and none of the acupuncture therapies demonstrated statistical superiority over antihistamines. Acupuncture combined with moxibustion ranked first in reducing the severity of pruritus (SUCRA = 96.27%, MD = -1.03, 95% CrI: -1.15, -0.91). Autohemotherapy combined with moxibustion ranked first in reducing the levels of immunoglobulin E (IgE) (SUCRA = 93.05%, MD = -36.23, 95% CrI: -55.33, -17.33). The combination of acupuncture, bloodletting puncture and cupping (BLP-C), and antihistamine ranked first in both reducing interleukin-4 (SUCRA = 97.95%, MD = -194.39, 95% CrI: -317.68, -71.10) and increasing IFN-γ (SUCRA = 99.78%, MD = 32.36, 95% CrI: 19.00, 46.49). Acupuncture combined with cupping therapy ranked first in reducing the incidence of adverse reactions (SUCRA = 91.69%, RR = 0.04, 95% CrI: 0.04, 0.24) and relapse rate (SUCRA = 91.79%, RR = 0.02, 95% CrI: 0, 0.09). Conclusion: Acupuncture therapies demonstrate good efficacy and safety in treating CSU. Nevertheless, optimal interventions should be selected based on the characteristics of symptoms, immune profiles, and patient tolerability. These findings should be interpreted cautiously and validated in larger, higher-quality trials due to study limitations. Systematic Review Registration: identifier CRD42024608056.
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.