Review Article
Acupuncture Methods for Primary Trigeminal Neuralgia: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Table 2
Pairwise meta-analysis of reduction of pain intensity.
| | Comparison | Number | MD (95% CI) | I2 | p |
| | MA | CM | 9 | 1.14 (0.48, 1.80) | 89% | <0.00001 | | MA | AM | 1 | −0.90 (−1.87, 0.07) | — | — | | MA | FA | 2 | −0.84 (−3.43, 1.75) | 86% | 0.008 | | MA | SA | 1 | 1.66 (0.93, 2.39) | — | — | | EA | MA | 2 | 0.29 (−1.49, 2.07) | 71% | 0.06 | | EA | FA | 1 | −1.40 (−3.17, 0.37) | — | — | | EA | CM | 1 | 1.07 (0.09, 2.05) | — | — | | AM | CM | 1 | −0.08 (−1.19, 1.03) | — | — | | MA + EA | MA | 1 | 3.18 (2.43, 3.93) | — | — | | MA + EA | EA | 2 | 1.25 (0.78, 1.72) | 0% | 0.32 | | MA + CM | CM | 7 | 1.19 (0.55, 1.84) | 89% | <0.00001 | | AM + CM | CM | 3 | 1.88 (0.87, 2.90) | 85% | 0.001 | | EA + CM | CM | 2 | 1.22 (0.42, 2.02) | 30% | 0.23 | | EA + CM | MA + CM | 2 | 0.61 (−0.62, 1.85) | 80% | 0.02 | | MA + CM | SA + CM | 1 | 1.60 (0.32, 2.88) | — | — |
|
|
∗Significant difference. MA: manual acupuncture; EA: electroacupuncture; AM: acupuncture-moxibustion; FA: fire acupuncture; SA: sham acupuncture; CM: conventional medicine.
|
