Electroacupuncture and Transcutaneous Electrical Acupoint Stimulation for Perioperative Neurocognitive Disorder in Older Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: Protocol for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Perioperative neurocognitive disorder (PND) is a critical concern for older patients undergoing cardiac surgery, impacting cognitive function and quality of life. Electroacupuncture and transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) hold promise for mitigating PND. This protocol outlines a systematic review and meta-analysis to thoroughly assess the efficacy of electroacupuncture and TEAS in older patients undergoing cardiac surgery with PND, providing up-to-date evidence for PND prevention and treatment. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to thoroughly assess the efficacy of electroacupuncture and TEAS in older patients undergoing cardiac surgery with PND, providing up-to-date evidence for PND prevention and treatment. METHODS: A comprehensive and systematic approach will be used to identify eligible studies from a diverse range of electronic databases, including 9 major sources such as PubMed (NLM) and Cochrane (Wiley), as well as 2 clinical trial registration websites. These studies will focus on investigating the effects of electroacupuncture and TEAS on PND in older patients undergoing cardiac surgery. The study selection will adhere to the criteria outlined in the patient, intervention, comparison, outcome, and studies (PICOS) format. Data extraction will be carried out by 2 independent researchers (YP and LS), using established tools to evaluate the risk of bias. The primary outcome will be PND incidence, with secondary outcomes including Mini Mental State Examination scores, neuron-specific enolase, S100β, interleukin-1β, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-α, time to first flatus, first defecation, bowel sound recovery, and hospitalization duration to be selectively reported. Adverse events linked to acupuncture, such as bleeding, needle site pain, and local reactions, rather than serious adverse events, will also be considered. Meta-analysis will be performed using appropriate statistical methods to assess the overall effect of electroacupuncture and TEAS on PND prevention, treatment, or other relevant outcomes. The Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool will be used for assessment, and data synthesis will be executed using the RevMan 5.4 software (Cochrane). RESULTS: We plan to summarize the eligible studies through the use of a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) flowchart. The findings will be showcased in the form of a summary table of evidence. Figures and forest plots will be used to illustrate the outcomes of the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The impacts of electroacupuncture and TEAS interventions on PND in older patients undergoing cardiac surgery have not yet been established. This protocol addresses a critical gap by thoroughly assessing electroacupuncture and TEAS for PND in older patients undergoing cardiac surgery, enhancing understanding of nonpharmacological interventions, and guiding future research and clinical practices in this field. Its strength lies in rigorous methodology, including comprehensive search strategies, independent review processes, and thorough assessments of the risk of bias. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023411927; https://tinyurl.com/39xdz6jb. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/55996.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.056 | 0.084 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.025 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".