Clinical efficacy of electroacupuncture and acupoint injection in the treatment of sudden deafness
于超生,于锋,邓海燕,李军政,黄昌锦,李慧
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-1245.2022.18.002
2022-01-01
Abstract:Objective:To compare the efficacies of electroacupuncture and acupoint injection in the treatment of sudden deafness.Methods:Using a randomized controlled prospective study method, 165 patients who met the inclusion criteria of sudden deafness were treated in the Department of Otolaryngology, Head, and Neck Surgery, Guangzhou Red Cross Hospital, Jinan University from April 2018 to January 2021, including 67 males and 98 females, aged (53.1±11.3) years. They were stratified and randomly divided into an electroacupuncture group, an acupoint group, and a control group. The electroacupuncture group was given electroacupuncture + drug treatment, the acupoint group was given acupoint injection + drug treatment, and the control group was only given drug treatment. The efficacy, hemorheology, cerebrovascular Doppler, auditory brainstem response, complications, and pain score were compared, and the possible mechanism was explored. Pearson's Chi-square test, analysis of covariance, and Mann-Whitney U test were used. Results:The total effective rate of the electroacupuncture group was 87.3% (48/55), that of the acupoint group was 67.3% (37/55), and that of the control group was 63.6% (35/55); Pearson's Chi-square test showed that the total effective rate of the electroacupuncture group was better than those of the acupoint group and the control group (both P<0.05). Hemorheological examination showed that the whole blood viscosity and plasma viscosity of the three groups were improved after treatment, and the pairwise comparison showed that those in the electroacupuncture group were better than those in the acupoint group and the control group (all P<0.05). Cerebrovascular Doppler examination showed that 45 cases in the electroacupuncture group were abnormal before treatment, 47 cases in the acupoint group, and 45 cases in the control group, including the increase or decrease of blood flow velocity, abnormal pulse index (PI), etc., 40 cases, 31 cases, and 28 cases were improved after treatment, with the improvement rates of 88.9%, 66.0%, and 62.2% respectively, and the pairwise comparison showed that the improvement rate of the electroacupuncture group was significantly better than those of the acupoint group and the control group (both P<0.05). The examination of auditory brainstem response showed that 49 cases in the electroacupuncture group were abnormal before treatment, 47 cases in the acupoint group, and 47 cases in the control group, 43 cases, 31 cases, and 30 cases were improved after treatment, with the improvement rates of 87.8%, 66.0%, and 63.8% respectively, and the pairwise comparison showed that the improvement rate of the electroacupuncture group was better than those of the acupoint group and the control group (both P<0.05). In terms of safety evaluation, there were no complications such as skin injury or infection in the electroacupuncture group and the acupoint group. The pain score suggested that the median scores of the electroacupuncture group and the acupoint group were 2 points, Mann Whitney U test suggested that the difference was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). Conclusions:In the treatment of sudden deafness, electroacupuncture is better than acupoint injection and drug treatment, and it is safe and reliable. Its mechanism may be related to improving the blood viscosity, cerebral blood supply, and auditory nerve function.