Abstract
Abstract
Background:
One of the basic and important principles of Traditional Chinese Medicine theory is syndrome differentiation, which is widely utilized for individual diagnosis and in the application of acupuncture treatment. However, the impact of syndrome differentiation on therapeutic effect is unclear because of insufficient supportive clinical evidence.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to analyze current Cochrane Database systematic reviews of acupuncture and to evaluate differences in therapeutic effects of acupuncture treatment when syndrome differentiation is utilized, compared to when this approach is not utilized.
Methods:
Cochrane Database systematic reviews of acupuncture were included if the reviews had sufficient data to perform subgroup analyses by syndrome differentiation applied during acupoints' selection. Searching was conducted across all available articles of the Cochrane Library, and the search concluded in July 2011.
Results:
Forty-four trials from five Cochrane reviews were included in 10 subgroup meta-analyses. Seven meta-analyses showed that there were no differences between trials using fixed acupoints prescriptions and trials using individualized treatment based on relevant symptom improvements in cases of acute stroke, depression, epilepsy, migraine, and peripheral joint osteoarthritis (OA). The remaining 3 meta-analyses showed that acupuncture with fixed prescriptions was superior to individualized acupuncture for pain relief of peripheral joint OA, compared to sham control.
Conclusions:
The available evidence showed no significant difference between acupuncture treatment with or without syndrome differentiation. Large, well-designed trials are warranted to address the use of syndrome differentiation for specific diseases or conditions in order to confirm if there are any advantages of using syndrome differentiation to achieve better therapeutic effects with acupuncture.
Iintroductions
The principles of acupuncture treatment include regulating Yin and Yang, strengthening the body's resistance, eliminating pathogens, and distinguishing between the presenting symptoms and the syndrome. In TCM, acupoints are selected from twelve regular meridians that correlate to individual organs. The meridians are the pathways through which Qi and Blood flow. Disorders of the meridians may affect corresponding organs; likewise, disorders of the organs will be reflected in the meridians. In acupuncture practice, points are selected depending on the meridian syndrome differentiation, which includes the following aspects3,4:
(1) Observation of any small changes on the surfaces of specific meridians or acupoints. Any localized changes to the skin may reflect the pathological state of Zheng and disease. Syndromes can be diagnosed by identifying certain signs and symptoms that emerge along the course of a particular meridian pathway. This can assist practitioners when they are designing individualized treatment protocols for patients. (2) Zheng may result from disharmony of an individual organ or from an interaction between organs. It is important to understand the unique physiological function of organs in TCM theory. Acupuncture can be administered according to TCM theory regarding syndrome differentiation, but this may also combined with modern medical diagnosis techniques.
5
(3) When applying acupuncture prescriptions, syndrome differentiation should be considered for selection of meridians, actions of acupoints, using appropriate acupuncture techniques and equipment, stimulation intensity, and application of combined therapies, such as moxibustion, cupping, and herbal medicine.
Acupuncture application based on clinical syndrome differentiation using meridian theories also addresses the whole body system, which reflects the unique character of TCM, thus ensuring the efficacy of acupuncture treatment. 6
Although syndrome differentiation is widely accepted in individual diagnosis and treatment using acupuncture, there remains insufficient clinical evidence regarding the impact of syndrome differentiation on therapeutic effect. This review aims to evaluate the difference of therapeutic effect between acupuncture treatments with or without syndrome differentiation as shown in Cochrane acupuncture reviews.
Methods
Inclusion Criteria
Cochrane systematic reviews evaluating the therapeutic effect of acupuncture, compared with no treatment, placebo, or conventional medication, which had meta-analysis with more than 4 included trials (at least 2 trials using syndrome differentiation for point selection and at least 2 trials that did not use this approach).
Identification and Selection of Reviews
All available Cochrane systematic reviews on acupuncture were searched from the Cochrane Library (the search ended in July 2011); search terms included
Data Extraction and Quality Assessment
The data were independently extracted from the included reviews. These data included authors, title of study, year of publication, study size, assessment of risk of bias within studies, details of methodological information, number of trials which used/did not use syndrome differentiation, and outcomes (with risk ratio [RR], or mean difference [MD], and relative 95% confidence interval [CI] for each trial).
According to criteria in the Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook, 7 the authors of all included reviews had already assessed the methodological quality of each included trial. The following characteristics were assessed: sequence generation; allocation concealment; blinding; incomplete data assessment; selective outcome reporting; and other sources of bias. There were three potential responses for these six items: “yes”; “no”; and “unclear.” In all cases an answer of “yes” indicated a low risk of bias and an answer of “no” indicated a high risk of bias. If there was insufficient detail reported in the study the response was listed as “unclear.”
Data Analysis and Statistical Methods
Data were extracted and summarized using RRs with 95% CIs for binary outcomes or MDs with 95% CIs for continuous outcomes. Revman 5.0.20 software was used for data analyses. Subgroup meta-analysis was performed, looking at different methods of points' selection (whether syndrome differentiation was used) and if the trials had good homogeneity (which was assessed by examining I2, a quantity that describes approximately the proportion of variation in point estimates caused by heterogeneity rather than by sampling error), in study design, participants, interventions, control, and outcome measures. The conservative random-effects model (REM) was used unless the degree of heterogeneity was readily explainable, or when the measure of heterogeneity I2 was <25%, in which case, a fixed effect model (FEM) was used.
Results
Description of Reviews
After primary searches of the Cochrane Library, 99 citations were identified, with the majority of these being excluded after reviewing their titles and abstracts; 32 full-text articles were retrieved, however; most of these were excluded because of insufficient data for subgroup meta-analysis. In total, five8–12 reviews with a combined 12,851 participants were included in this current study (Fig. 1 and Table 1).

Flow chart of review inclusions and exclusions.
There were five conditions involved within the five review articles, including epilepsy, migraine prophylaxis, peripheral joint osteoarthritis (OA), depression, and acute stroke. There were 93 RCTs originally included in these reviews. Because of the previous meta-analysis and characteristics for each trial, only 44 studies from the five reviews were subsequently included in the current subgroup meta-analysis. The subgroup was categorized by whether syndrome differentiation was used during acupoints' selection. All the trials that applied syndrome differentiation mentioned that acupoints were either standardized or individually selected “according to Traditional Chinese Medicine,” or “depending on Chinese syndrome diagnosis” (Table 2).
TCM, Traditional Chinese Medicine; OA, osteoarthritis.
Methodological Quality of Included Randomized Controlled Trials
Among the 44 included trials, only seven were assessed as having a “low risk of bias,” with 26 trials listed as having a “high risk of bias” because of poor methodological quality, and 11 assessed as being “unclear” (Table 2).
Results of Subgroup Meta-Analyses
From the five included reviews, a subgroup analyses for each outcome measurement was conducted across each disease respectively according to whether syndrome differentiation was used for acupoints' selection. Overall, ten subgroup analyses were conducted, and seven showed no difference between trials using fixed prescriptions and individualized prescriptions with respect to symptom reduction for acute stroke, depression, epilepsy, migraine prophylaxis, and peripheral joint OA. (Table 3).
MD, mean difference; CI, confidence interval; RR, risk ratio; SSRI, selective serotonin, reuptake inhibitor.
One meta-analyses (Table 3) showed acupuncture with a fixed prescription had significant therapeutic effect on pain relief of peripheral joint OA, compared to a sham control condition with respect to short-term effects (MD −2.24, 95%CI −4.00 to −0.48, p=0.01, 6 trials, REM), although individualized acupuncture produced no difference from sham control (MD −0.42, 95% CI −1.68 to 0.84, p=0.51, 3 trials, REM). Two subgroup analyses (Table 3) also found similar results for acupuncture versus sham acupuncture with respect to responses for migraine prophylaxis 8 weeks and 6 months following randomization. Acupuncture without syndrome differentiation (RR 4.83, 95% CI 1.81 to 12.89, p=0.002, 2 trials, FEM and RR 1.79, 95%CI 1.16 to 2.77, p=0.008, 2 trials, FEM) seemed superior to acupuncture with syndrome differentiation (RR 1.09, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.26, p=0.28, 5 trials, FEM and RR 1.07, 95%CI 0.92 to 1.25, p=0.38, 4 trials, FEM).
Discussion
According to the ten subgroup analyses across 44 RCTs, applying syndrome differentiation in acupoints' selection was no more effective than using a fixed formula for acupoints' selection, which seems inconsistent with TCM theory.
A possible explanation for these findings may include the relatively small number of trials assessed, with most resulting in a high risk of bias with respect to methodological quality (Table 2). According to a literature review conducted in 2005, syndrome differentiation was cited as being important in acupuncture application; however, insufficient attention is currently placed upon this in clinical practice. 13 Researchers who conducted the review collected clinical reports of acupuncture and moxibustion published in three major Chinese acupuncture journals from 2001 to 2003. Only 35 out 2864 studies reported that selection of acupoints was based on meridian differentiation. In addition, because the limitation of only including RCTs, a fixed prescription was more likely to be used as the standard treatment for easier assessment and control.
As a result of there being insufficient original studies directly comparing acupuncture with or without syndrome differentiation, only included trials from Cochrane reviews were included in the current subgroup meta-analysis. Data from each study were extracted using the existing analysis; this secondary analysis may have increased the potential of bias on data synthesis or selective reporting. Another limitation of this review was how point selection was identified when creating standardized treatment. Given that this information was not always reported, it was impossible to know if syndrome differentiation was used.
It is well-known that acupuncture is especially useful for promoting and regulating Qi and Blood, and for dredging meridians to stop pain. Acupuncture syndrome differentiation is not only determined by acupoint prescription, but also relies on point stimulation. The majority of the trials did not report the skill levels and experience of the acupuncture practitioners, which may make an impact on the therapeutic effect of individualized acupuncture.
Correct treatment is based on analysis of each individual and disease. The main goal in differentiating among syndromes is to identify changes in the functioning of the body and to understand the characteristics of the disease. It is imperative to remember that different symptoms can occur in the same disease, and different diseases sometimes produce the same symptoms. 14 One advantage of applying syndrome differentiation is to create individualized treatment. 15 However, it is necessary to be aware that, although syndrome differentiation is the key to diagnosis and treatment according to TCM theory, current clinical evidence is insufficient to support a beneficial effect of syndrome differentiation.
Conclusions
The available evidence showed no significant difference between acupuncture treatment with or without syndrome differentiation. Because of the above limitations of the current study, further searching of clinical trials outside of Cochrane reviews could potentially provide further data regarding the effectiveness of syndrome differentiation. However, a large number of well-designed pragmatic RCTs to support the potential benefit of syndrome differentiation with respect to therapeutic effects of acupuncture for specific diseases are still warranted. More attention to syndrome differentiation when applying acupuncture should be reported in clinical research in the future.
Footnotes
Acknowledges
Drs. Cao and Liu were supported a grant from an international cooperation project (No. 2009DFA31460) and the basic operational funding for scientific research from Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, both in China. Dr. Liu was also partially supported by Grant Number R24 AT001293 from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine of the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Ms. Bourchier was supported by the Centre for Complementary Medicine Research at the University of Western Sydney, Australia.
Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist.
