PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Chronic prostatitis (CP) is a common condition that affects many individuals. Previous clinical trials have explored the use of moxibustion as a potential treatment for CP. However, the evidence on the effectiveness of moxibustion for CP remains limited. Therefore, this study aimed to comprehensively assess the effects of moxibustion for CP.
METHODS: In order to gather relevant and up-to-date information, we conducted a systematic literature search of databases including Cochrane Library, PUBMED, EMBASE, CNKI, and Wangfang from inception until June 30, 2023. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that investigated the use of moxibustion for CP were included in this study. The primary outcomes of interest were the National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) scores and the overall response rate. To evaluate the quality of the included studies, we used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.
RESULTS: After analyzing the data from 8 RCTs involving a total of 664 patients, we found significant differences in NIH-CPSI scores between moxibustion and other treatment modalities. Specifically, when compared with herbal medicine, moxibustion was associated with a mean difference (MD) of -1.78 in NIH-CPSI scores (95% confidence interval [CI] [-2.78, -0.78], P < .001), and when compared with western medicine, moxibustion was associated with a MD of -5.24 in NIH-CPSI scores (95% CI [-7.80, -2.67], P < .08). In terms of the overall response rate, moxibustion was found to be superior to herbal medicine, with a MD of 2.36 (95% [19, 4.67], P = .01). Additionally, when moxibustion was combined with herbal medicine, it yielded a higher overall response rate with a MD of 4.07 (95% CI [1.54, 10.74], P = .005) compared to herbal medicine alone. Moxibustion also outperformed western medicine in terms of the overall response rate, with a MD of 4.56 (95% CI [2.24, 9.26], P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of this study, moxibustion appears to be a potentially efficacious treatment for CP. The results suggest that moxibustion can improve NIH-CPSI scores and overall response rate in patients with CP. However, further high-quality studies are needed to validate these results and establish the long-term effects of moxibustion as a treatment for CP.
METHODS: In order to gather relevant and up-to-date information, we conducted a systematic literature search of databases including Cochrane Library, PUBMED, EMBASE, CNKI, and Wangfang from inception until June 30, 2023. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that investigated the use of moxibustion for CP were included in this study. The primary outcomes of interest were the National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) scores and the overall response rate. To evaluate the quality of the included studies, we used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.
RESULTS: After analyzing the data from 8 RCTs involving a total of 664 patients, we found significant differences in NIH-CPSI scores between moxibustion and other treatment modalities. Specifically, when compared with herbal medicine, moxibustion was associated with a mean difference (MD) of -1.78 in NIH-CPSI scores (95% confidence interval [CI] [-2.78, -0.78], P < .001), and when compared with western medicine, moxibustion was associated with a MD of -5.24 in NIH-CPSI scores (95% CI [-7.80, -2.67], P < .08). In terms of the overall response rate, moxibustion was found to be superior to herbal medicine, with a MD of 2.36 (95% [19, 4.67], P = .01). Additionally, when moxibustion was combined with herbal medicine, it yielded a higher overall response rate with a MD of 4.07 (95% CI [1.54, 10.74], P = .005) compared to herbal medicine alone. Moxibustion also outperformed western medicine in terms of the overall response rate, with a MD of 4.56 (95% CI [2.24, 9.26], P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of this study, moxibustion appears to be a potentially efficacious treatment for CP. The results suggest that moxibustion can improve NIH-CPSI scores and overall response rate in patients with CP. However, further high-quality studies are needed to validate these results and establish the long-term effects of moxibustion as a treatment for CP.
摘要：
背景：慢性前列腺炎（CP）是影响许多个体的常见病。先前的临床试验已经探索了艾灸作为CP的潜在治疗方法。然而,关于艾灸治疗CP有效性的证据仍然有限。因此,本研究旨在综合评价艾灸对CP的影响。
方法：为了收集相关和最新的信息，我们对包括Cochrane图书馆在内的数据库进行了系统的文献检索，pubmed,EMBASE,CNKI,和王芳从成立到2023年6月30日。本研究仅包括研究艾灸用于CP的随机临床试验（RCT）。感兴趣的主要结果是美国国立卫生研究院慢性前列腺炎症状指数（NIH-CPSI）评分和总反应率。为了评估纳入研究的质量，我们使用了Cochrane偏差风险工具。
结果：在分析了总共664名患者的8个RCT的数据后，我们发现艾灸与其他治疗方式在NIH-CPSI评分上存在显著差异.具体来说,与草药相比，艾灸与NIH-CPSI评分的平均差（MD）为-1.78相关（95％置信区间[CI][-2.78，-0.78]，P<.001),与西药相比，艾灸与NIH-CPSI评分的MD为-5.24相关（95%CI[-7.80，-2.67]，P<.08)。就总体反应率而言，艾灸被发现优于草药，MD为2.36(95%[19，4.67]，P=0.01）。此外,当艾灸与草药结合时，它产生了更高的总有效率，MD为4.07(95%CI[1.54,10.74]，P=.005）与单独的草药相比。艾灸在整体反应率方面也优于西医,MD为4.56(95%CI[2.24，9.26]，P<.001)。
结论：根据本研究的结果，艾灸似乎是一种潜在有效的CP治疗方法。结果提示艾灸可提高CP患者NIH-CPSI评分及总体缓解率。然而,需要进一步的高质量研究来验证这些结果,并确定艾灸治疗CP的长期疗效.
方法：为了收集相关和最新的信息，我们对包括Cochrane图书馆在内的数据库进行了系统的文献检索，pubmed,EMBASE,CNKI,和王芳从成立到2023年6月30日。本研究仅包括研究艾灸用于CP的随机临床试验（RCT）。感兴趣的主要结果是美国国立卫生研究院慢性前列腺炎症状指数（NIH-CPSI）评分和总反应率。为了评估纳入研究的质量，我们使用了Cochrane偏差风险工具。
结果：在分析了总共664名患者的8个RCT的数据后，我们发现艾灸与其他治疗方式在NIH-CPSI评分上存在显著差异.具体来说,与草药相比，艾灸与NIH-CPSI评分的平均差（MD）为-1.78相关（95％置信区间[CI][-2.78，-0.78]，P<.001),与西药相比，艾灸与NIH-CPSI评分的MD为-5.24相关（95%CI[-7.80，-2.67]，P<.08)。就总体反应率而言，艾灸被发现优于草药，MD为2.36(95%[19，4.67]，P=0.01）。此外,当艾灸与草药结合时，它产生了更高的总有效率，MD为4.07(95%CI[1.54,10.74]，P=.005）与单独的草药相比。艾灸在整体反应率方面也优于西医,MD为4.56(95%CI[2.24，9.26]，P<.001)。
结论：根据本研究的结果，艾灸似乎是一种潜在有效的CP治疗方法。结果提示艾灸可提高CP患者NIH-CPSI评分及总体缓解率。然而,需要进一步的高质量研究来验证这些结果,并确定艾灸治疗CP的长期疗效.
