BACKGROUND: Myasthenia Gravis (MG) is a disorder of neuromuscular transmission bringing mild ocular weakness to severe generalized muscle weakness and disability. The conventional treatments have long-term side effects, and Chinese herbal medicines (CHM) have shown possible effect and safety for MG patients, but the existing evidence was not robust enough and the results were out of date.
METHODS: Searching for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted in 7 databases and clinical trial registries until July 2021. The ROB 2 tool was used to assess the study quality and GRADE was used to assess the quality of whole evidence. Meta-analyses were conducted and the results were presented as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS: Nineteen RCTs (1283 participants) testing 13 kinds of CHM with adequate randomization were included and six RCTs investigating Compound Huangqi were included in the meta-analyses. In addition to conventional treatment, nine CHMs reduced symptom scores of MG. Compound Huangqi plus conventional treatment (pyridostigmine bromide or prednisone or both) reduced the symptom scores compared with conventional treatment (MD = -3.56, 95%CI -4.86 to -2.26). Less adverse events happened in the CHM groups (3/247 in the CHM groups, 52/245 in the control groups, RR = 0.13, 95%CI 0.06 to 0.30, 9 RCTs, a total of 492 participants). The effect on quality of life was inconsistent.
CONCLUSIONS: Nine CHMs could probably bring benefit for MG symptom improvement. Moderate to low certainty of evidence supported Compound Huangqi added-on conventional treatment probably bring extra benefit of improving MG symptoms. Adding CHMs could be safer than giving only conventional treatment.
BACKGROUND: The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID: 32718).

Cow\'s milk protein allergy (CMPA) is an immune-mediated allergic response to proteins in milk that is common in infants. Broad CMPA symptoms make diagnosis a challenge, particularly in primary care. Symptom scores may improve a clinician\'s awareness of symptoms, indicating a need for further testing. This systematic review examined the development and evaluation of such symptom scores for use in infants.
CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases were searched from inception to 3 December 2019 (Updated 14 November 2020) for diagnostic accuracy studies, randomised controlled trials, observational studies, economic evaluations, qualitative studies and studies reporting development of the tools. Data were not suitable for meta-analysis due to clinical and methodological heterogeneity, so were narratively synthesised.
We found two symptom scores evaluated in one and fourteen studies, respectively. Estimated sensitivity and specificity ranged from 37% to 98% and 38% to 93%. The evaluations of each tool were at high risk of bias or failed to address issues such as clinical and cost-effectiveness.
Estimates of accuracy of symptom scores for CMPA offered so far should be interpreted cautiously. Rigorous, conflict-free research based on well-defined roles for the tools is urgently required.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) better improves patient outcomes and quality of life for adults with allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis (AR/C) with or without mild to moderate asthma.
METHODS: Systematic review methodology was based on the Cochrane Collaboration handbook and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. Four databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science) were queried from inception to July 30, 2020. Two independent reviewers screened potentially relevant studies and assessed risk of bias. Outcomes of interest were symptom score (SS), medication score (MS), combined symptom medication score (CSMS), and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ). Meta-analyses with an adjusted indirect comparison were conducted in RevMan 5.4.1.
RESULTS: Seven SCIT versus SLIT randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated no significant differences for any outcomes, but insufficient data precluded direct meta-analysis. For the adjusted indirect comparison, 46 RCTs over 39 studies were included for SCIT versus placebo (n = 13) and SLIT versus placebo (n = 33). Statistically significant results favoring SCIT were found for SS (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.31-0.49), MS (SMD = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.14-0.39), CSMS (SMD = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.17-0.67), and RQLQ (MD = 0.24; 95% CI = 0.04-0.44). Statistically significant results favoring SLIT were found for SS (SMD = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.32-0.53), MS (SMD = 0.40; 95% CI = 0.28-0.53), CSMS (SMD = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.29-0.45), and RQLQ (MD = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.20-0.43). No significant differences were found between SCIT and SLIT for SS (SMD = -0.02; 95% CI = -0.15 to 0.11), MS (SMD = -0.14; 95% CI = -0.31 to 0.03), CSMS (SMD = 0.05; 95% CI = -0.21 to 0.31), or RQLQ (MD = -0.08; 95% CI = -0.31 to 0.15).
CONCLUSIONS: SCIT and SLIT are comparably effective treatments for adults with AR/C. More RCTs analyzing SCIT versus SLIT are needed to directly compare the two. Laryngoscope, 2021.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy of acupuncture for dysarthria, and to explore the rules of acupoints selection for dysarthria.
METHODS: The clinical randomized control trial literature regarding acupuncture for dysarthria published before January of 2018 were searched in databases, including CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, CBM, PubMed, Ebsco, Science Direct and Cochrane Library. The information of included studies was extract and the quality was assessed. The Meta analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software. The frequency of acupoints was calculated by using Excel software to analyzed the rules of acupoints selection.
RESULTS: Totally 21 papers were included, involving 1651 patients. The pooled effects of clinical efficacy: heterogeneity test P =0.74, I 2=0%, OR =6.36, 95% CI: 4.55, 8.88, Z =10.84 (P<0.01), indicating the efficacy in the treatment group was significantly higher than that in the control group. The pooled effects of the symptom score in Frenchay scale: heterogeneity test P =0.56, I 2=0%, WMD =3.20, 95% CI: 1.38, 5.02, Z =3.45 (P<0.01), indicating the efficacy in the treatment group was significantly higher than that in the control group. The acupoints with frequency of more than 5 times were Fengchi (GB 20), Yuye (EX-HN 13), Jinjin (EX-HN 12), Lianquan (CV 23), Baihui (GV 20), tongue-three needles and Yamen (GV15). The meridians with frequency of more than 5 times were the extra channels, governor vessel, gallbladder channel, conception vessel and stomach channel.
CONCLUSIONS: The clinical efficacy of acupuncture combined with speech training/regular treatment is significantly superior to that of control group (speech training, medication, regular treatment); acupuncture is safe and effective for dysarthria; the majority of selected acupoint is local acupoints around tongue, throat and neck, as well as extra points and empirical points. However, high-quality randomized controlled trials with large sample sizes are still needed to provide further evidence.