Is complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) cost-effective? a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Out-of-pocket expenditures of over $34 billion per year in the US are an apparent testament to a widely held belief that complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies have benefits that outweigh their costs. However, regardless of public opinion, there is often little more than anecdotal evidence on the health and economic implications of CAM therapies. The objectives of this study are to present an overview of economic evaluation and to expand upon a previous review to examine the current scope and quality of CAM economic evaluations. METHODS: The data sources used were Medline, AMED, Alt-HealthWatch, and the Complementary and Alternative Medicine Citation Index; January 1999 to October 2004. Papers that reported original data on specific CAM therapies from any form of standard economic analysis were included. Full economic evaluations were subjected to two types of quality review. The first was a 35-item checklist for reporting quality, and the second was a set of four criteria for study quality (randomization, prospective collection of economic data, comparison to usual care, and no blinding). RESULTS: A total of 56 economic evaluations (39 full evaluations) of CAM were found covering a range of therapies applied to a variety of conditions. The reporting quality of the full evaluations was poor for certain items, but was comparable to the quality found by systematic reviews of economic evaluations in conventional medicine. Regarding study quality, 14 (36%) studies were found to meet all four criteria. These exemplary studies indicate CAM therapies that may be considered cost-effective compared to usual care for various conditions: acupuncture for migraine, manual therapy for neck pain, spa therapy for Parkinson's, self-administered stress management for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, pre- and post-operative oral nutritional supplementation for lower gastrointestinal tract surgery, biofeedback for patients with "functional" disorders (eg, irritable bowel syndrome), and guided imagery, relaxation therapy, and potassium-rich diet for cardiac patients. CONCLUSION: Whereas the number and quality of economic evaluations of CAM have increased in recent years and more CAM therapies have been shown to be of good value, the majority of CAM therapies still remain to be evaluated

Complement system activation contributes to the ependymal damage induced by microbial neuraminidase

Background In the rat brain, a single intracerebroventricular injection of neuraminidase from Clostridium perfringens induces ependymal detachment and death. This injury occurs before the infiltration of inflammatory blood cells; some reports implicate the complement system as a cause of these injuries. Here, we set out to test the role of complement. Methods The assembly of the complement membrane attack complex on the ependymal epithelium of rats injected with neuraminidase was analyzed by immunohistochemistry. Complement activation, triggered by neuraminidase, and the participation of different activation pathways were analyzed by Western blot. In vitro studies used primary cultures of ependymal cells and explants of the septal ventricular wall. In these models, ependymal cells were exposed to neuraminidase in the presence or absence of complement, and their viability was assessed by observing beating of cilia or by trypan blue staining. The role of complement in ependymal damage induced by neuraminidase was analyzed in vivo in two rat models of complement blockade: systemic inhibition of C5 by using a function blocking antibody and testing in C6-deficient rats. Results The complement membrane attack complex immunolocalized on the ependymal surface in rats injected intracerebroventricularly with neuraminidase. C3 activation fragments were found in serum and cerebrospinal fluid of rats treated with neuraminidase, suggesting that neuraminidase itself activates complement. In ventricular wall explants and isolated ependymal cells, treatment with neuraminidase alone induced ependymal cell death; however, the addition of complement caused increased cell death and disorganization of the ependymal epithelium. In rats treated with anti-C5 and in C6-deficient rats, intracerebroventricular injection of neuraminidase provoked reduced ependymal alterations compared to non-treated or control rats. Immunohistochemistry confirmed the absence of membrane attack complex on the ependymal surfaces of neuraminidase-exposed rats treated with anti-C5 or deficient in C6. Conclusions These results demonstrate that the complement system contributes to ependymal damage and death caused by neuraminidase. However, neuraminidase alone can induce moderate ependymal damage without the aid of complement