OBJECTIVE: To compare the analgesic efficacy and safety of acupuncture and lornoxicam in acute renal colic (ARC). DESIGN SETTING PARTICIPANT: A randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled, single-centered trial was conducted at Susong County People's Hospital from October 2019 to November 2020. Eighty-four patients with ARC were randomly divided into lornoxicam group (Group L) and acupuncture group (Group A). Group A was treated with acupuncture at Sanyinjiao (SP6), Yinlingquan (SP9) and normal saline, and Group L was treated with sham acupuncture at SP6, SP9 and lornoxicam. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores and adverse reactions such as nausea and dizziness were recorded within 5, 10, 15, 20 and 40 minutes after treatment. The main outcome of this study was the short-term effective (STE) rate, the secondary outcome was the onset time, and the safety index was incidence of adverse reactions. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients completed this study, including 41 patients (21 males and 20 females) in Group L and 39 patients (21 males and 18 females) in Group A. Group A exhibited lower scores versus group L after treatment (P < 0.05). The overall STE of group L was 61.00% (25/41), significantly lower than group A [84.62% (33/39)] (P < 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between group A [2.6% (1/39)] and group L [7.3% (3/41)] (P = 0.616). The ordered logistic regression analysis showed patients receiving acupuncture therapy are more likely to be cured [OR = 2.887, 95% CI: (1.190, 7.000), P = 0.019]. CONCLUSION: Acupuncture at SP6, SP9 and intramuscular injection of lornoxicam can effectively and safely relieve ARC, but the former has faster and better analgesic effect. Moreover, the incidence of adverse reactions was similar between the two treatments. This acupuncture therapy is recommended as a complementary therapy for ARC.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the analgesic efficacy and safety of acupuncture and lornoxicam in acute renal colic (ARC). DESIGN SETTING PARTICIPANT: A randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled, single-centered trial was conducted at Susong County People's Hospital from October 2019 to November 2020. Eighty-four patients with ARC were randomly divided into lornoxicam group (Group L) and acupuncture group (Group A). Group A was treated with acupuncture at Sanyinjiao (SP6), Yinlingquan (SP9) and normal saline, and Group L was treated with sham acupuncture at SP6, SP9 and lornoxicam. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores and adverse reactions such as nausea and dizziness were recorded within 5, 10, 15, 20 and 40 minutes after treatment. The main outcome of this study was the short-term effective (STE) rate, the secondary outcome was the onset time, and the safety index was incidence of adverse reactions. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients completed this study, including 41 patients (21 males and 20 females) in Group L and 39 patients (21 males and 18 females) in Group A. Group A exhibited lower scores versus group L after treatment (P < 0.05). The overall STE of group L was 61.00% (25/41), significantly lower than group A [84.62% (33/39)] (P < 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between group A [2.6% (1/39)] and group L [7.3% (3/41)] (P = 0.616). The ordered logistic regression analysis showed patients receiving acupuncture therapy are more likely to be cured [OR = 2.887, 95% CI: (1.190, 7.000), P = 0.019]. CONCLUSION: Acupuncture at SP6, SP9 and intramuscular injection of lornoxicam can effectively and safely relieve ARC, but the former has faster and better analgesic effect. Moreover, the incidence of adverse reactions was similar between the two treatments. This acupuncture therapy is recommended as a complementary therapy for ARC.
Authors: Christian Türk; Aleš Petřík; Kemal Sarica; Christian Seitz; Andreas Skolarikos; Michael Straub; Thomas Knoll Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-08-28 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Gregory W Hosier; Thomas McGregor; Darren Beiko; Gregory E Tasian; Christopher Booth; Marlo Whitehead; D Robert Siemens Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2020-08 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Saeed R Khan; Margaret S Pearle; William G Robertson; Giovanni Gambaro; Benjamin K Canales; Steeve Doizi; Olivier Traxer; Hans-Göran Tiselius Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2016-02-25 Impact factor: 52.329
Authors: John M Hollingsworth; Edward C Norton; Samuel R Kaufman; R Matt Smith; J Stuart Wolf; Brent K Hollenbeck Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-03-19 Impact factor: 7.450