1. J Urol. 2018 Oct;200(4):815-822. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.05.001. Epub 2018 May
5.

Acupuncture for Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome: A Randomized,
Sham Acupuncture Controlled Trial.

Qin Z(1), Zang Z(2), Zhou K(3), Wu J(4), Zhou J(4), Kwong JSW(5), Liu Z(6).

Author information: 
(1)Department of Acupuncture, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese
Medical Sciences, Beijing, China; School of Life Sciences, Beijing University of 
Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
(2)Department of Acupuncture, Yantai Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine,
Yantai, China.
(3)Catholic Health System Internal Medicine Training Program, Jacobs School of
Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.
(4)Department of Acupuncture, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese
Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
(5)Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine,
Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
(6)Department of Acupuncture, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese
Medical Sciences, Beijing, China. Electronic address: liuzhishun@aliyun.com.

PURPOSE: We investigated the effectiveness of acupuncture in patients with
chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed this 32-week randomized, controlled trial
with 8 weeks of treatment followed by 24 weeks of followup to compare acupuncture
with sham acupuncture. Participants with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain 
syndrome were randomly assigned to acupuncture or noninvasive sham acupuncture.
The primary outcome was the change in the NIH-CPSI (National Institutes of Health
Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index) total score from baseline to week 8. Secondary
outcomes were the NIH-CPSI subscale scores, pain severity, the I-PSS
(International Prostate Symptom Score), the global response rate and satisfaction
assessment.
RESULTS: A total of 68 participants 18 to 50 years old were enrolled and included
in intent to treat analyses. Baseline characteristics were comparable in the 2
groups. The reduction in the NIH-CPSI total score differed significantly between 
the 2 groups at weeks 8, 20 and 32 with a difference of -5.7 (95% CI -7.8--3.7), 
-6.7 (95% CI -8.9--4.5) and -7.4 (95% CI -9.8--5.1), respectively (each
p <0.001). All differences were greater than the 4-point minimal clinically
important difference. No significant difference was found between the groups in
NIH-CPSI pain and quality of life subscale scores or in I-PSS at week 4 (each
p >0.05). For all other secondary outcomes the acupuncture group was
statistically better than the sham acupuncture group.
CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture showed clinical and long-lasting benefits compared with 
sham acupuncture for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Randomized
controlled trials with larger sample sizes are needed in the future.

Copyright © 2018 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.
Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.05.001 
PMID: 29733836  [Indexed for MEDLINE]