Transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation for the prevention of perioperative neurocognitive disorders in geriatric patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND

To evaluate whether transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) decreases rates of perioperative neurocognitive disorders (PND) when used as an adjuvant method during perioperative period in geriatric patients since the new definition was released in 2018.

METHODS

Six databases [Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals, WanFang Database, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library] were systematically searched. Data analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1 software (Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, the Cochrane Collaboration, 2020). Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence interval were calculated using a random effects model. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

13 randomized clinical trials (999 patients) in total were included. TEAS had positive effects on preventing the incidence of PND (RR: 0.43; 0.31, 0.61; P < .001; low certainty) [postoperative delirium within 7 days (RR: 0.39; 0.26, 0.59; P < .001), delayed neurocognitive recovery within 3 months (RR: 0.51; 0.33, 0.78; P = .002)]. TEAS could also improve the scores of the confusion assessment method (CAM) (Mean difference: -1.30; -2.14, -0.46; P = .003; low certainty). Limited evidence suggested that TEAS could reduce the serum levels of biochemical indicator (S100β) (SMD = -1.08, -1.67, -0.49, P < .001; I2  = 83%; very low certainty) as well as anesthetic requirements (remifentanil) (SMD: -1.58; -2.54, -0.63; P = .001; I2  = 87%; very low certainty). Subgroup analysis indicated that different protocols of TEAS had significant pooled benefits (TEAS used only in surgery and in combination with postoperative intervention) (RR: 0.45; 0.31, 0.63; P < .001). Acupoint combination (LI4 and PC6) in the TEAS group had more significantly advantages (RR: 0.34; 0.17, 0.67; P = .002). TEAS group had a lower incidence of PND in different surgery type (orthopedic surgery and abdominal surgery) (RR: 0.43; 0.30, 0.60; P < .001), as well as with different anesthetic modality (intravenous anesthesia and intravenous and inhalational combined anesthesia) (RR: 0.38; 0.23, 0.61; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In terms of clinical effectiveness, TEAS appeared to be beneficial for prophylaxis of PND during a relatively recent period, noting the limitations of the current evidence.