Cystic Tumor of the Atrioventricular Node Causing Rapid-Onset and Reversible Complete Heart Block.

Cystic tumors of the atrioventricular node are rare primary cardiac neoplasms, frequently reported as a postmortem diagnosis during autopsy. Despite their small size, they can present with complete heart block or sudden cardiac death. Herein, we present a case of rapidly progressing high-grade atrioventricular block that improved after surgery. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).

Catheter Ablation of Life-Threatening Ventricular Arrhythmias in Athletes.

A recent surveillance analysis indicates that cardiac arrest/death occurs in ≈1:50,000 professional or semi-professional athletes, and the most common cause is attributable to life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias (VAs). It is critically important to diagnose any inherited/acquired cardiac disease, including coronary artery disease, since it frequently represents the arrhythmogenic substrate in a substantial part of the athletes presenting with major VAs. New insights indicate that athletes develop a specific electro-anatomical remodeling, with peculiar anatomic distribution and VAs patterns. However, because of the scarcity of clinical data concerning the natural history of VAs in sports performers, there are no dedicated recommendations for VA ablation. The treatment remains at the mercy of several individual factors, including the type of VA, the athlete's age, and the operator's expertise. With the present review, we aimed to illustrate the prevalence, electrocardiographic (ECG) features, and imaging correlations of the most common VAs in athletes, focusing on etiology, outcomes, and sports eligibility after catheter ablation.

Thrombolysis with alteplase 3-4.5 hours after acute ischaemic stroke: trial reanalysis adjusted for baseline imbalances.

OBJECTIVES: Alteplase is commonly recommended for acute ischaemic stroke within 4.5 hours after stroke onset. The Third European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study (ECASS III) is the only trial reporting statistically significant efficacy for clinical outcomes for alteplase use 3-4.5 hours after stroke onset. However, baseline imbalances in history of prior stroke and stroke severity score may confound this apparent finding of efficacy. We reanalysed the ECASS III trial data adjusting for baseline imbalances to determine the robustness or sensitivity of the efficacy estimates. DESIGN: Reanalysis of randomised placebo-controlled trial. We obtained access to the ECASS III trial data and replicated the previously reported analyses to confirm our understanding of the data. We adjusted for baseline imbalances using multivariable analyses and stratified analyses and performed sensitivity analysis for missing data. SETTING: Emergency care. PARTICIPANTS: 821 adults with acute ischaemic stroke who could be treated 3-4.5 hours after symptom onset. INTERVENTIONS: Intravenous alteplase (0.9 mg/kg of body weight) or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The original primary efficacy outcome was modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0 or 1 (ie, being alive without any disability) and the original secondary efficacy outcome was a global outcome based on a composite of functional end points, both at 90 days. Adjusted analyses were only reported for the primary efficacy outcome and the original study protocol did not specify methods for adjusted analyses. Our adjusted reanalysis included these outcomes, symptom-free status (mRS 0), dependence-free status (mRS 0-2), mortality (mRS 6) and change across the mRS 0-6 spectrum at 90 days; and mortality and symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage at 7 days. RESULTS: We replicated previously reported unadjusted analyses but discovered they were based on a modified interpretation of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score. The secondary efficacy outcome was no longer significant using the original NIHSS score. Previously reported adjusted analyses could only be replicated with significant effects for the primary efficacy outcome by using statistical approaches not reported in the trial protocol or statistical analysis plan. In analyses adjusting for baseline imbalances, all efficacy outcomes were not significant, but increases in symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: Reanalysis of the ECASS III trial data with multiple approaches adjusting for baseline imbalances does not support any significant benefits and continues to support harms for the use of alteplase 3-4.5 hours after stroke onset. Clinicians, patients and policymakers should reconsider interpretations and decisions regarding management of acute ischaemic stroke that were based on ECASS III results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00153036.

Acupuncture for hip osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is a major cause of pain and functional limitation. Few hip OA treatments have been evaluated for safety and effectiveness. Acupuncture is a traditional Chinese medical therapy which aims to treat disease by inserting very thin needles at specific points on the body. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of acupuncture in patients with hip OA. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase all through March 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared acupuncture with sham acupuncture, another active treatment, or no specific treatment; and RCTs that evaluated acupuncture as an addition to another treatment. Major outcomes were pain and function at the short term (i.e. < 3 months after randomization) and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: Six RCTs with 413 participants were included. Four RCTs included only people with OA of the hip, and two included a mix of people with OA of the hip and knee. All RCTs included primarily older participants, with a mean age range from 61 to 67 years, and a mean duration of hip OA pain from two to eight years. Approximately two-thirds of participants were women. Two RCTs compared acupuncture versus sham acupuncture; the other four RCTs were not blinded. All results were evaluated at short term (i.e. four to nine weeks after randomization).In the two RCTs that compared acupuncture to sham acupuncture, the sham acupuncture control interventions were judged believable, but each sham acupuncture intervention was also judged to have a risk of weak acupuncture-specific effects, due to placement of non-penetrating needles at the correct acupuncture points in one RCT, and the use of penetrating needles not inserted at the correct points in the other RCT. For these two sham-controlled RCTs, the risk of bias was low for all outcomes.The combined analysis of two sham-controlled RCTs gave moderate quality evidence of little or no effect in reduction in pain for acupuncture relative to sham acupuncture. Due to the small sample sizes in the studies, the confidence interval includes both the possibility of moderate benefit and the possibility of no effect of acupuncture (120 participants; Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) -0.13, (95% Confidence Interval (CI) -0.49 to 0.22); 2.1 points greater improvement with acupuncture compared to sham acupuncture on 100 point scale (i.e., absolute percent change -2.1% (95% CI -7.9% to 3.6%)); relative percent change -4.1% (95% CI -15.6% to 7.0%)). Estimates of effect were similar for function (120 participants; SMD -0.15, (95% CI -0.51 to 0.21)). No pooled estimate, representative of the two sham-controlled RCTs, could be calculated or reported for the quality of life outcome.The four other RCTs were unblinded comparative effectiveness RCTs, which compared (additional) acupuncture to four different active control treatments.There was low quality evidence that addition of acupuncture to the routine primary care that RCT participants were receiving from their physicians was associated with statistically significant and clinically relevant benefits, compared to the routine primary physician care alone, in pain (1 RCT; 137 participants; mean percent difference -22.9% (95% CI -29.2% to -16.6%); relative percent difference -46.5% (95% CI -59.3% to -33.7%)) and function (mean percent difference -19.0% (95% CI -24.41 to -13.59); relative percent difference -38.6% (95% CI -49.6% to -27.6%)). There was no statistically significant difference for mental quality of life and acupuncture showed a small, significant benefit for physical quality of life.The effects of acupuncture compared with either advice plus exercise or NSAIDs are uncertain.We are also uncertain whether acupuncture plus patient education improves pain, function, and quality of life, when compared to patient education alone.In general, the overall quality of the evidence for the four comparative effectiveness RCTs was low to very low, mainly due to the potential for biased reporting of patient-assessed outcomes due to lack of blinding and sparse data.Information on safety was reported in four RCTs. Two RCTs reported minor side effects of acupuncture, which were primarily minor bruising, bleeding, or pain at needle insertion sites. Four RCTs reported on adverse events, and none reported any serious adverse events attributed to acupuncture. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture probably has little or no effect in reducing pain or improving function relative to sham acupuncture in people with hip osteoarthritis. Due to the small sample size in the studies, the confidence intervals include both the possibility of moderate benefits and the possibility of no effect of acupuncture. One unblinded trial found that acupuncture as an addition to routine primary physician care was associated with benefits on pain and function. However, these reported benefits are likely due at least partially to RCT participants' greater expectations of benefit from acupuncture. Possible side effects associated with acupuncture treatment were minor.

Systematic reviews in oral health: a quality imperative.

Systematic reviews must be conducted responsibly, eliminating any scope for error and bias. The reporting quality of a systematic review should follow and conform to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. AMSTAR (Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews) is an assessment tool, which has been developed specifically to assess the quality of the process used in conducting the review. There has been a significant increase in the number of systematic reviews in oral health and several reports have been published stating low AMSTAR ratings of systematic reviews in dentistry. Systematic reviews answer key clinical questions objectively, and are often used to underpin clinical guidelines in oral health. If the quality of these reviews is compromised, this can result in inadequate or inappropriate clinical guidelines. Consequently, ensuring consistent high quality is a key imperative for systematic reviews in oral health.

Referral Patterns for Primary Prophylaxis Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy for an Urban US Population.

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have been demonstrated to improve survival for both primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac arrest. However, studies suggest that ICD therapy is underused in appropriate candidates. Sex and racial disparities in ICD use have been suggested. We sought to characterize the referral patterns of high-risk patients for the primary prophylaxis of sudden cardiac arrest at a tertiary academic medical center serving a diverse population in an urban US setting. Electronic hospital databases were retrospective reviewed for patients meeting criteria for prophylactic ICD implantation. We evaluated the association of gender, age, race, and primary language with the referral and subsequent implantation of an ICD. We identified 1,055 patients satisfying prophylactic ICD criteria: 600 men, mean age 62.6 years, 27.6% black, 19.3% white, 23.3% Hispanic, and 49.8% primary language of English. Of the 673 patients (63.7%) referred for ICD evaluation, 345 underwent implantation, 125 declined, and 203 had significant co-morbidities that precluded implantation. Gender, race, and primary language were not associated with referral for ICD or with decision to proceed with implantation. Patients of increased age were less likely to be referred for ICD and were more likely to refuse implantation. ICD therapy was not considered in 146 patients eligible for prophylactic implantation. In conclusion, referral rates for ICD consideration were higher at our institution than in previous reports. Nonetheless, 14% of appropriate patients were not considered. This argues for the importance of increased education for patients and referring physicians.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Device and Novel Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin for Stroke Prevention in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia. Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation are at increased risk of stroke; therefore, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of different approaches to prevent this major complication. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted electronic database searches of phase III randomized controlled trials. The groups were novel oral anticoagulants, Watchman left atrial appendage occlusion device (DEVICE), and warfarin. Efficacy outcomes were stroke or systemic embolism, and all-cause mortality. Safety outcome was major bleeding and procedure-related complications. A subgroup analysis of the elderly population was done. We used random-effects model to compare pooled outcomes and tested for heterogeneity. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed for each outcome. Seven randomized controlled trials (n=73,978) were included. There was a significant difference favoring novel oral anticoagulants for systemic embolism (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.97; P=0.01), all-cause mortality (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.94; P<0.001), and safety outcomes (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65-0.97; P=0.026) compared with warfarin. No difference was seen between DEVICE and warfarin for efficacy end points; however, DEVICE had more complications (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.14-3.01; P=0.012). In the elderly (6 randomized controlled trials, n=30,699), systemic embolism was favored with novel oral anticoagulants over warfarin (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.68-0.87; P≤0.001). No evidence of significant publication bias was found. CONCLUSIONS: Novel oral anticoagulants is superior to warfarin for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. This benefit was also observed in the elderly population. DEVICE is a reasonable noninferior alternative to warfarin for stroke prevention, but cautious use is essential given safety concerns.

Paleolithic nutrition for metabolic syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Paleolithic nutrition, which has attracted substantial public attention lately because of its putative health benefits, differs radically from dietary patterns currently recommended in guidelines, particularly in terms of its recommendation to exclude grains, dairy, and nutritional products of industry. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether a Paleolithic nutritional pattern improves risk factors for chronic disease more than do other dietary interventions. DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the Paleolithic nutritional pattern with any other dietary pattern in participants with one or more of the 5 components of metabolic syndrome. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed risk of bias. Outcome data were extracted from the first measurement time point (≤6 mo). A random-effects model was used to estimate the average intervention effect. The quality of the evidence was rated with the use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: Four RCTs that involved 159 participants were included. The 4 control diets were based on distinct national nutrition guidelines but were broadly similar. Paleolithic nutrition resulted in greater short-term improvements than did the control diets (random-effects model) for waist circumference (mean difference: -2.38 cm; 95% CI: -4.73, -0.04 cm), triglycerides (-0.40 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.76, -0.04 mmol/L), systolic blood pressure (-3.64 mm Hg; 95% CI: -7.36, 0.08 mm Hg), diastolic blood pressure (-2.48 mm Hg; 95% CI: -4.98, 0.02 mm Hg), HDL cholesterol (0.12 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.03, 0.28 mmol/L), and fasting blood sugar (-0.16 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.44, 0.11 mmol/L). The quality of the evidence for each of the 5 metabolic components was moderate. The home-delivery (n = 1) and dietary recommendation (n = 3) RCTs showed similar effects with the exception of greater improvements in triglycerides relative to the control with the home delivery. None of the RCTs evaluated an improvement in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The Paleolithic diet resulted in greater short-term improvements in metabolic syndrome components than did guideline-based control diets. The available data warrant additional evaluations of the health benefits of Paleolithic nutrition. This systematic review was registered at PROSPERO (www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO) as CRD42014015119.

Manual lymphatic drainage for lymphedema following breast cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: More than one in five patients who undergo treatment for breast cancer will develop breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). BCRL can occur as a result of breast cancer surgery and/or radiation therapy. BCRL can negatively impact comfort, function, and quality of life (QoL). Manual lymphatic drainage (MLD), a type of hands-on therapy, is frequently used for BCRL and often as part of complex decongestive therapy (CDT). CDT is a fourfold conservative treatment which includes MLD, compression therapy (consisting of compression bandages, compression sleeves, or other types of compression garments), skin care, and lymph-reducing exercises (LREs). Phase 1 of CDT is to reduce swelling; Phase 2 is to maintain the reduced swelling. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of MLD in treating BCRL. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, WHO ICTRP (World Health Organization's International Clinical Trial Registry Platform), and Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register from root to 24 May 2013. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs of women with BCRL. The intervention was MLD. The primary outcomes were (1) volumetric changes, (2) adverse events. Secondary outcomes were (1) function, (2) subjective sensations, (3) QoL, (4) cost of care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We collected data on three volumetric outcomes. (1) LE (lymphedema) volume was defined as the amount of excess fluid left in the arm after treatment, calculated as volume in mL of affected arm post-treatment minus unaffected arm post-treatment. (2) Volume reduction was defined as the amount of fluid reduction in mL from before to after treatment calculated as the pretreatment LE volume of the affected arm minus the post-treatment LE volume of the affected arm. (3) Per cent reduction was defined as the proportion of fluid reduced relative to the baseline excess volume, calculated as volume reduction divided by baseline LE volume multiplied by 100. We entered trial data into Review Manger 5.2 (RevMan), pooled data using a fixed-effect model, and analyzed continuous data as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We also explored subgroups to determine whether mild BCRL compared to moderate or severe BCRL, and BCRL less than a year compared to more than a year was associated with a better response to MLD. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials were included. Based on similar designs, trials clustered in three categories.(1) MLD + standard physiotherapy versus standard physiotherapy (one trial) showed significant improvements in both groups from baseline but no significant between-groups differences for per cent reduction.(2) MLD + compression bandaging versus compression bandaging (two trials) showed significant per cent reductions of 30% to 38.6% for compression bandaging alone, and an additional 7.11% reduction for MLD (MD 7.11%, 95% CI 1.75% to 12.47%; two RCTs; 83 participants). Volume reduction was borderline significant (P = 0.06). LE volume was not significant. Subgroup analyses was significant showing that participants with mild-to-moderate BCRL were better responders to MLD than were moderate-to-severe participants.(3) MLD + compression therapy versus nonMLD treatment + compression therapy (three trials) were too varied to pool. One of the trials compared compression sleeve plus MLD to compression sleeve plus pneumatic pump. Volume reduction was statistically significant favoring MLD (MD 47.00 mL, 95% CI 15.25 mL to 78.75 mL; 1 RCT; 24 participants), per cent reduction was borderline significant (P=0.07), and LE volume was not significant. A second trial compared compression sleeve plus MLD to compression sleeve plus self-administered simple lymphatic drainage (SLD), and was significant for MLD for LE volume (MD -230.00 mL, 95% CI -450.84 mL to -9.16 mL; 1 RCT; 31 participants) but not for volume reduction or per cent reduction. A third trial of MLD + compression bandaging versus SLD + compression bandaging was not significant (P = 0.10) for per cent reduction, the only outcome measured (MD 11.80%, 95% CI -2.47% to 26.07%, 28 participants).MLD was well tolerated and safe in all trials.Two trials measured function as range of motion with conflicting results. One trial reported significant within-groups gains for both groups, but no between-groups differences. The other trial reported there were no significant within-groups gains and did not report between-groups results. One trial measured strength and reported no significant changes in either group.Two trials measured QoL, but results were not usable because one trial did not report any results, and the other trial did not report between-groups results.Four trials measured sensations such as pain and heaviness. Overall, the sensations were significantly reduced in both groups over baseline, but with no between-groups differences. No trials reported cost of care.Trials were small ranging from 24 to 45 participants. Most trials appeared to randomize participants adequately. However, in four trials the person measuring the swelling knew what treatment the participants were receiving, and this could have biased results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: MLD is safe and may offer additional benefit to compression bandaging for swelling reduction. Compared to individuals with moderate-to-severe BCRL, those with mild-to-moderate BCRL may be the ones who benefit from adding MLD to an intensive course of treatment with compression bandaging. This finding, however, needs to be confirmed by randomized data.In trials where MLD and sleeve were compared with a nonMLD treatment and sleeve, volumetric outcomes were inconsistent within the same trial. Research is needed to identify the most clinically meaningful volumetric measurement, to incorporate newer technologies in LE assessment, and to assess other clinically relevant outcomes such as fibrotic tissue formation.Findings were contradictory for function (range of motion), and inconclusive for quality of life.For symptoms such as pain and heaviness, 60% to 80% of participants reported feeling better regardless of which treatment they received.One-year follow-up suggests that once swelling had been reduced, participants were likely to keep their swelling down if they continued to use a custom-made sleeve.

Outcomes in patients with various forms of aortic stenosis including those with low-flow low-gradient normal and low ejection fraction.

Low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis with normal ejection fraction (LFLGNEF AS) is a newly characterized poorly understood entity within the AS spectrum. Whether LFLGNEF AS has a worse prognosis than typical AS remains controversial. We retrospectively identified 4,546 individual patients with any type of AS on echocardiogram from 2003 through 2013 and categorized them into 5 cohorts: (1) mild AS, (2) moderate AS, (3) severe AS, (4) LFLGNEF AS (ejection fraction≥55%), and (5) low-flow low-gradient low ejection fraction AS (LFLGLEF AS; ejection fraction<55%). Survival analysis was used to compare outcomes of LFLGNEF AS with those of the other cohorts. AS was classified as mild in 591 patients, moderate in 2,358, severe in 500, LFLGNEF in 776, and LFLGLEF in 318. The study group had a mean age of 80.5 years, 61% were women, and the patients were followed for 2.26±1.16 years. Among subjects managed without valve replacement, total mortality for the LFLGNEF AS group was lower compared with that in both the severe AS and the LFLGLEF AS groups (p=0.007 and p<0.001, respectively). The prognosis for LFLGNEF AS was worse, however, compared with those with mild and moderate AS (p<0.001, both). In conclusion, no survival differences were found among AS types among those who received valve replacement. The survival rate in LFLGNEF is better than that in severe AS or LFLGLEF but is worse than that in mild or moderate AS. Valve replacement seems reasonable to pursue in select patients.

Limited yield of hospitalization for the evaluation of syncope in patients presenting to an urban tertiary medical center.

Syncope is a frequent presenting complaint in the emergency department and is associated with significant medical costs. We examined the utility of inpatient evaluation of syncope for patients in whom a diagnosis was not established in the emergency department. We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients presenting with syncope to an urban tertiary care medical center. A diagnosis was not established after initial evaluation in the emergency department in 171 of 230 patients admitted. Inhospital evaluation led to a diagnosis in 26 patients. Acute intervention was required in 2 patients. Our observations suggest that an inpatient evaluation of syncope for patients in whom a diagnosis is not made on initial evaluation is of low yield, and outpatient follow-up may be safe.

Randomised clinical trials on acupuncture in the Korean literature: bibliometric analysis and methodological quality.

OBJECTIVE: Acupuncture systematic reviewers have increasingly searched Chinese databases and journals to identify eligible randomised clinical trials (RCTs). However, reviewers have infrequently searched for eligible RCTs in Korean databases and journals. This study aimed to identify difficult to locate acupuncture RCTs in Korean databases and journals and to assess the characteristics and quality of the identified RCTs. METHODS: Eleven electronic databases and seven journals were searched up to December 2012. All RCTs using needle acupuncture were considered for inclusion. Key study characteristics were extracted and risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-three publications met our inclusion criteria. Acupuncture RCTs in the Korean literature emerged in the mid-1990s and increased in the mid-2000s. Diverse methods of acupuncture were used, including some methods unique to Korea (eg, Saam acupuncture). The largest proportion of trials evaluated acupuncture for musculoskeletal conditions (27.3%). The mean sample size was 44.3±25.3 per trial. Random sequence generation methods were reported in 44.8% of the RCTs, whereas only 11.9% reported methods of allocation concealment. A low proportion of trials reported participant blinding (32.9%) and outcome assessment blinding (18.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Korean acupuncture trials, many of which evaluate acupuncture styles unique to Korea, are typically omitted from systematic reviews of acupuncture, resulting in the potential for language bias. The development of this database of difficult to locate Korean trials, which includes English language translations of abstracts, will enable these trials of varying quality to be assessed for inclusion in future acupuncture systematic reviews.

Manual acupuncture for treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Manual acupuncture has commonly been used in China, either alone or in combination with conventional medicine, to treat diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review to evaluate the potential benefits and harms of manual acupuncture for DPN to justify its clinical use. METHODS: We searched for published and unpublished randomized controlled trials of manual acupuncture for DPN till 31 March 2013. Revman 5.2 software was used for data analysis with effect estimate presented as relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of 25 trials involving 1649 participants were included. The methodological quality of included trials was generally poor. Meta-analysis showed that manual acupuncture had better effect on global symptom improvement compared with mecobalamin (RR 1.31, 95%CI 1.21 to 1.42), vitamin B1 and B12 (RR 1.55, 95%CI 1.33 to 1.80), and no treatment (RR 1.56, 95%CI 1.31 to 1.85), and that the combination of manual acupuncture and mecobalamin had better effect compared with mecobalamin alone on global symptom improvement (RR 1.56, 95%CI 1.28 to 1.90). Adverse events were not reported in any trials. The asymmetric funnel plot suggested publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the number of trials of manual acupuncture for DPN and their uniformly positive results, no clinically relevant conclusions can be drawn from this review due to the trials' high risks of bias and the possibility of publication bias. Clearly defined and internationally acknowledged outcome measures are required for future study. There remains an urgent need for training Chinese researchers in conducting unbiased trials as well as prospectively registering all initiated Chinese trials to avoid publication bias.