Abstract
Objectives:
To observe the effect and safety of acupuncture on quality of life, pain, and prostate symptoms in patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).
Methods:
Seventy patients with CP/CPPS were randomly divided into an acupuncture group (35 cases, 1 case was eliminated) and a sham acupuncture group (35 cases, 3 cases dropped out). The patients in the acupuncture group were treated with routine acupuncture at bilateral Zhongliao (BL 33), Huiyang (BL 35), Shenshu (BL 23) and Sanyinjiao (SP 6), while the patients in the sham acupuncture group were treated with shallow needling at non-meridian and non-acupoint points beside bilateral Zhongliao (BL 33), Huiyang (BL 35), Shenshu (BL 23) and Sanyinjiao (SP 6),without manipulation to induce arrival of qi (deqi). Both groups retained the needles for 30 min, with one session every other day, three times a week, for a total of 8 weeks (24 sessions). Before and after treatment, and at the follow-up of 24 weeks after treatment completion, the scores of MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36, including 8 dimensions of physical function [PF], role physical function [RP], bodily pain [BP], general health status [GH], vitality [VT], social function [SF], role emotional [RE], and mental health [MH], which can be summarized as physical component summary [PCS] and mental component summary [MCS]), pelvic pain visual analogue scale (VAS), National Institutes of Health chronic prostatitis symptom index (NIH-CPSI), and international prostate symptom score (IPSS) were evaluated, and safety of both groups was assessed.
Results:
After treatment and at the follow-up, the scores of each dimension and PCS, MCS scores of SF-36 in the acupuncture group were higher than those before treatment (P<0.05, P<0.01); compared before treatment, the RP, BP, and SF scores and PCS score in the sham acupuncture group were increased after treatment (P<0.05, P<0.01). After treatment, the acupuncture group had higher scores in RP, BP, GH, MH and PCS, MCS than those in the sham acupuncture group (P<0.05, P<0.01); at the follow-up, except for PF and RE dimensions, the scores in each dimension and PCS, MCS scores in the acupuncture group were higher than those in the sham acupuncture group (P<0.05, P<0.01). After treatment and at the follow-up, pelvic pain VAS, NIH-CPSI, IPSS scores in the acupuncture group were lower than those before treatment (P<0.01); in the sham acupuncture group, pelvic pain VAS, NIH-CPSI scores were lower after treatment, and NIH-CPSI score at the follow-up was lower compared with those before treatment (P<0.01). After treatment and at the follow-up, pelvic pain VAS, NIH-CPSI, IPSS scores in the acupuncture group were lower than those in the sham acupuncture group (P<0.01, P<0.05). No significant adverse reactions were observed in both groups, and the incidence rates of adverse reactions had no significant difference (P>0.05).
Conclusions:
Acupuncture could effectively improve the quality of life, reduce pain levels, alleviate prostate symptoms, and shows favorable long-term efficacy in patients with CP/CPPS.
