Department of Acupuncture and Moxibustion Medicine, College of Korean Medicine, Daejeon University, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
KM Science Research Division, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Sep 9;101(36):e30386. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000030429.
Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a disease that affects the quality of life by causing lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men. Electroacupuncture (EA) and moxibustion therapy have been suggested as an adjunct therapy for improving LUTS in patients with BPH, but clinical studies evaluating the effectiveness of EA and its cotreatment with electronic moxibustion (EM) in patients who have been prescribed alpha blockers have yet to be reported. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of EA and EM.
Twenty-eight patients diagnosed with BPH were randomized to treatment group (TG, n = 14) or control group (CG, n = 14). The TG continued to use the previously prescribed alpha blocker and received the cotreatment of EA and EM 3 times a week for 6 weeks. The CG continued to use the previously prescribed alpha blocker alone for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the mean change in the international prostate symptom score (IPSS) from baseline to week 6. The secondary outcomes were IPSS at week 3 and 12, clinical relevance, IPSS life satisfaction, EuroQol-Five dimensions, average urinary flow rate, maximum urinary flow rate, and prostate volume.
The IPSS decreased at all time points with a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (3W: P = .0313; 6W: P = .0010; 12W: P = .0304). Based on the minimal clinically important difference (MCID, 3 points), there were significant differences between the TG and the CG at week 3, 6, and 12 (3W: P = .0461; 6W: P = .0123; 12W: P = .0216). Significant group × week interaction effects were found for the IPSS score (P = .0018), as determined from analyses using repeated measures analysis of variance. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in IPSS life satisfaction, EuroQol-Five dimensions, average urinary flow rate, maximum urinary flow rate, and prostate volume.
EA and its cotreatment with EM might have a beneficial effect as an adjunct therapy in improving LUTS in patients with BPH. Large-scale randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm the effectiveness and safety of EA and its cotreatment with EM.
良性前列腺增生(BPH)是一种疾病,会导致男性下尿路症状(LUTS),从而影响生活质量。电针(EA)和艾灸疗法已被提议作为改善 BPH 患者 LUTS 的辅助治疗方法,但尚未有研究评估 EA 及其与电子艾灸(EM)联合治疗已开处α受体阻滞剂的患者的有效性。因此,本研究旨在评估 EA 和 EM 的有效性和安全性。
将 28 例诊断为 BPH 的患者随机分为治疗组(TG,n=14)或对照组(CG,n=14)。TG 继续使用先前开处的α受体阻滞剂,并每周接受 3 次 EA 和 EM 联合治疗,共 6 周。CG 继续单独使用先前开处的α受体阻滞剂,共 6 周。主要结局是从基线到第 6 周时国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)的平均变化。次要结局是第 3 周和第 12 周的 IPSS、临床相关性、IPSS 生活满意度、欧洲五维健康量表(EQ-5D)、平均尿流率、最大尿流率和前列腺体积。
在所有时间点,两组之间的 IPSS 均有统计学差异(3W:P=0.0313;6W:P=0.0010;12W:P=0.0304)。根据最小临床重要差异(MCID,3 分),TG 与 CG 在第 3、6 和 12 周时存在显著差异(3W:P=0.0461;6W:P=0.0123;12W:P=0.0216)。通过重复测量方差分析的重复测量分析发现,IPSS 评分存在显著的组×周交互效应(P=0.0018)。两组之间的 IPSS 生活满意度、EQ-5D、平均尿流率、最大尿流率和前列腺体积无显著差异。
EA 及其与 EM 的联合治疗可能作为改善 BPH 患者 LUTS 的辅助治疗方法具有有益效果。需要进行大规模的随机对照试验来确认 EA 及其与 EM 的联合治疗的有效性和安全性。