Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
PLoS One. 2013 Apr 12;8(4):e59449. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0059449. Print 2013.
To evaluate the effects of electroacupuncture (EA) on the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), postvoid residual urine (PVR), and maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), and explore the difference between EA at acupoints and non-acupoints in patients with moderate to severe benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH).
Men with BPH and IPSS ≥8 were enrolled. Participants were randomly allocated to receive EA at acupoint (treatment group, n = 50) and EA at non-acupoint (control group, n = 50). The primary outcome measure includes the change of IPSS at the 6th week and the secondary outcome measures include changes of PVR and Qmax at the 6th week and change of IPSS at the 18th week.
100/192 patients were included. At the 6th week, treatment group patients had a 4.51 (p<0.001) and 4.12 (p<0.001) points greater decline in IPSS than the control group in the intention to treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations. At the 18th week, a 3.2 points (p = 0.001) greater decline was found in IPSS for the treatment. No significant differences were found between the two groups in Qmax at the 6th week (p = 0.819). No significant difference was observed in PVR (P = 0.35).
Acupoint EA at BL 33 had better effects on IPSS, but no difference on PVR and Qmax as compared with non-acupoint EA. The results indicate that EA is effective in improving patient's quality of life and acupoint may have better therapeutic effects than non-acupoints in acupuncture treatments of BPH.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01218243.
评价电针对国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、剩余尿(PVR)和最大尿流率(Qmax)的影响,并探讨电针对中度至重度良性前列腺增生(BPH)患者穴位与非穴位的差异。
纳入 IPSS≥8 的 BPH 男性患者。将患者随机分配至穴位电针(治疗组,n=50)和非穴位电针(对照组,n=50)。主要观察指标为第 6 周时 IPSS 的变化,次要观察指标为第 6 周时 PVR 和 Qmax 的变化以及第 18 周时 IPSS 的变化。
共纳入 192 例患者中的 100 例。在意向治疗(ITT)和符合方案(PP)人群中,治疗组第 6 周时 IPSS 分别下降了 4.51(p<0.001)和 4.12(p<0.001)分,比对照组更明显。第 18 周时,治疗组的 IPSS 下降了 3.2 分(p=0.001)。两组患者第 6 周时 Qmax 无显著差异(p=0.819)。PVR 无显著差异(P=0.35)。
BL 33 穴位电针治疗对 IPSS 的疗效优于非穴位电针,但对 PVR 和 Qmax 无影响。结果表明,电针治疗能有效改善患者生活质量,穴位治疗可能比非穴位治疗对 BPH 有更好的疗效。
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01218243。