n/a
Article Publish Status: FREE
Abstract Title:

Effectiveness and safety of electroacupuncture and its cotreatment with electronic moxibustion in the treatment of patients with moderate benign prostatic hyperplasia using alpha blocker: An assessor-blinded, randomized, controlled pilot study.

Abstract Source:

Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Sep 9 ;101(36):e30386. PMID: 36086755

Abstract Author(s):

Hyo Bin Kim, Chang-Hyun Han, Ju Hyun Jeon, Eunseok Kim, Ojin Kwon, Young Eun Choi, Changsop Yang, Yang Chun Park, Young Il Kim

Article Affiliation:

Hyo Bin Kim

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: 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.

METHODS: 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.

RESULTS: 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.

CONCLUSION: 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.

Study Type : Human Study

Print Options


Key Research Topics

This website is for information purposes only. By providing the information contained herein we are not diagnosing, treating, curing, mitigating, or preventing any type of disease or medical condition. Before beginning any type of natural, integrative or conventional treatment regimen, it is advisable to seek the advice of a licensed healthcare professional.

© Copyright 2008-2024 GreenMedInfo.com, Journal Articles copyright of original owners, MeSH copyright NLM.