To summarize the existing evidence and evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture as a clinical treatment for osteoporosis. Six English and four Chinese databases were searched from their inception to April 2017. Randomized controlled trials were included, in which warm acupuncture, needling or electroacupuncture were compared with sole Western medicine with osteoporosis. All the data were assessed and extracted by two authors independently. The bias risk assessment recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to assess the quality of the selected studies. This meta-analysis was conducted by using RevMan 5.3. Pooled analyses were calculated by standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed by I test. Thirty-five studies involving 3014 patients were located. Meta-analysis showed that warm acupuncture could increase the bone mineral density of lumar (SMD [Formula: see text] 0.93, 95% CI [Formula: see text] 0.65, 1.21, [Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.00001) and femur (MD[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.11, 95% CI[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.05, 0.16, P[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.0002), the level of serum calcium (MD[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.18, 95% CI[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.13, 0.24, [Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.00001) and estradiol (SMD[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.65, 95% CI[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.32, 0.98, P[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.0001), relieve pain (MD[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]-1.64, 95% CI[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]-2.69, -0.59, P[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.002), decrease the level of serum alkaline phosphatase (MD[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]-7.8, 95% CI[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]-14.17, -0.84, P [Formula: see text] 0.03) compared with sole Western medicine. Electroacupuncture could relieve pain (MD[Formula: see text][Formula: see text] -1.32, 95% CI[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]-2.15, -0.48, P[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.002), increase the level of serum calcium (MD[Formula: see text][Formula: see text][Formula: see text]-0.12, 95% CI [Formula: see text] -0.16,-0.09, [Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.00001) and decrease the level of serum alkaline phosphatase (MD [Formula: see text] -3.63, 95% CI [Formula: see text] -6.60, -0.66, P [Formula: see text] 0.02) compared with sole Western medicine. Needling could relieve pain (MD [Formula: see text] -2.27, 95% CI [Formula: see text] -3.11, -1.43, [Formula: see text][Formula: see text]0.00001) compared with sole Western medicine. This present systematic review indicated that acupuncture could be an effective therapy for treating ost...

No abstract

There is no convinced evidence to support the benefits of using MS in the management of PFD. The applicability of MS in the treatment of PFD remains uncertain, so larger, well-designed trials with longer follow-up periods adopted relevant and comparable outcomes are needed to be further explored to provide a definitive conclusion.

Background Peritoneal metastasis often occurs in patients with colorectal cancer peritoneal metastasis, and the prognosis is poor. A large body of evidence highlights the beneficial effects of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) on survival, but to date, there is little consensus on the optimal treatment strategy for patients with colorectal cancer peritoneal metastasis. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of CRS + HIPEC on survival and provide reference for the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer peritoneal metastasis. Methods This systematic review and meta-analysis is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Knowledge, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were screened from inception of the review to March 11, 2022. Ten studies were included in qualitative and quantitative analysis. Results A total of 3200 patients were enrolled in the study, including 788 patients in the CRS and HIPEC groups and 2412 patients in the control group, of which 3 were randomized controlled trials and 7 were cohort studies. The 3 randomized controlled studies were of high quality, and the quality scores of the 7 cohort studies were all 7 or above, indicating high quality. The results showed that the OS of CRS + HIPEC group was higher than that of control group (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.38–0.73; P < 0.00001, I2 = 82.9%); the heterogeneity of the studies was large. The subgroup analysis showed that the OS of CRS and HIPEC group was higher than that of PC group (HR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.30–0.47; P = 0.215, I2 = 31%) and higher than that in CRS group (HR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.49–1.07; P = 0.163, I2 = 44.8%); the heterogeneity of the studies was low. In the OPEN group, the OS of THE CRS and HIPEC groups was higher than that in the control group (HR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.38–0.70; P = 0.353, I2 = 3.9%); OPEN group showed lower heterogeneity. The OS of 60–100-min group was higher than that in the control group (HR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.49–0.88; P = 0.172, I2 = 37.4%); the heterogeneity of the studies was low. Sensitivity analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the results of the combined analysis after each study was deleted. The results of publication bias showed that the P-value of Egger and Begg tests was 0.078 > 0.05, indicating that there is no publication bias. Conclusions CRS + HIPEC can improve the survival rate of patients with colorectal cancer peritoneal metastasis