4.6 Review

Activation likelihood estimation identifies brain regions activated during puncturing at Hegu in healthy volunteers: A meta-analysis

期刊

FRONTIERS IN NEUROSCIENCE
卷 16, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2022.1084362

关键词

acupuncture; Hegu; LI 4; ALE; neuroimaging

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China
  2. [8207152138]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review summarizes the neuroimaging studies on acupuncture at Hegu in healthy volunteers, revealing diverse findings. The study suggests that the organismal status of the study subjects may have an important impact on the effect of acupoints.
Background: Hegu is the most commonly used acupoints for pain relief. Recently, several functional neuroimaging studies have been performed on acupuncture at Hegu in healthy volunteers, but these studies have yielded diverse findings. Therefore, there is an urgent need to understand the brain response characteristics of acupuncture at Hegu.Methods: Neuroimaging studies on acupuncture at Hegu published before October 2022 were collected from PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Embase, and CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) databases, and were screened by strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The extraction of brain coordinates was performed by two independent researchers, and the results were analyzed using activation likelihood estimation (ALE) analysis based on quantitative coordinates.Results: In total, 338 studies were searched, of which 19 studies were included in the final analysis after a rigorous double-blind screening review. Activation likelihood estimation showed that postcentral gyrus in the left brain were activated, whereas the anterior cingulate in the left brain and superior temporal gyrus in the right brain were deactivated.Conclusion: Acupuncture at Hegu in healthy volunteers did not reveal specific brain regions. This finding implies that organismal status of the study subjects may have an important impact on the effect of acupoints.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据