Suppr超能文献

针灸是医生治疗慢性前列腺炎/慢性盆腔疼痛综合征的另一个好选择吗?最新文献综述

Is Acupuncture Another Good Choice for Physicians in the Treatment of Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome? Review of the Latest Literature.

作者信息

Li Junjun, Dong Liang, Yan Xuhong, Liu Xiaozhang, Li Ying, Yu Xujun, Chang Degui

机构信息

Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.

The Reproductive & Women-Children Hospital, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.

出版信息

Pain Res Manag. 2020 Mar 9;2020:5921038. doi: 10.1155/2020/5921038. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). A search of PUBMED, EMBASE, Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, Chinese Biomedicine Literature (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wang-Fang Database, Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP), and other available resources was made for studies (up to February 2019). Searches were limited to studies published in English and Chinese. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to the efficacy and/or safety of acupuncture for CP/CPPS were included. Two investigators independently evaluated the quality of the studies. A total of 11 studies were included, involving 748 participants. The results revealed that compared with sham acupuncture (MD: -6.53 [95% CI: -8.08 to -4.97]) and medication (MD: -4.72 [95% CI: -7.87 to -1.56]), acupuncture could lower total NIH-CPSI score more effectively. However, there are no significant differences between acupuncture and sham acupuncture in terms of IPSS score. In terms of NIH-CPSI voiding domain subscore, no significant differences were found between acupuncture and medication. Compared with sham acupuncture (OR: 0.12 [95% CI: 0.04 to 0.40) and medication (OR: 3.71 [95% CI: 1.83 to 7.55]), the results showed favorable effects of acupuncture in improving the response rate. Acupuncture plus medication is better than the same medication in improving NIH-CPSI total score and NIH-CPSI pain domain subscore. In conclusion, the evidence suggests that acupuncture may be an effective intervention for patients with CP/CPPS. However, due to the heterogeneity of the methods and high risk of bias, we cannot draw definitive conclusions about the entity of the acupuncture's effect on alleviating the symptoms of CP/CPPS. The adverse events of acupuncture are mild and rare.

摘要

本研究旨在评估针刺治疗慢性前列腺炎/慢性盆腔疼痛综合征(CP/CPPS)的疗效和安全性。检索了PUBMED、EMBASE、Cochrane系统评价数据库(CENTRAL)、科学引文索引(Web of Science)、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中国知网(CNKI)、万方数据库、维普中文科技期刊数据库以及其他可用资源,查找相关研究(截至2019年2月)。检索限于以英文和中文发表的研究。仅纳入与针刺治疗CP/CPPS的疗效和/或安全性相关的随机对照试验(RCT)。两名研究者独立评估研究质量。共纳入11项研究,涉及748名参与者。结果显示,与假针刺(MD:-6.53 [95%CI:-8.08至-4.97])和药物治疗(MD:-4.72 [95%CI:-7.87至-1.56])相比,针刺能更有效地降低NIH-CPSI总分。然而,针刺与假针刺在国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)方面无显著差异。在NIH-CPSI排尿领域子评分方面,针刺与药物治疗之间未发现显著差异。与假针刺(OR:0.12 [95%CI:0.04至0.40])和药物治疗(OR:3.71 [95%CI:1.83至7.55])相比,结果显示针刺在提高有效率方面有良好效果。针刺联合药物治疗在改善NIH-CPSI总分和NIH-CPSI疼痛领域子评分方面优于单纯药物治疗。总之,证据表明针刺可能是CP/CPPS患者的一种有效干预措施。然而,由于方法的异质性和高偏倚风险,我们无法就针刺缓解CP/CPPS症状的效果得出明确结论。针刺的不良事件轻微且罕见。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bbed/7085851/32857acacd7f/PRM2020-5921038.001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验