论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨体外冲击波治疗IIIB型慢性前列腺炎的临床疗效。方法将32例ⅢВ型慢性前列腺炎患者随机分为治疗组(20例)及对照组(12例),治疗组患者给予低能量级别冲击波治疗。对照组给予体外电场热疗。两组均每周治疗1次,连续治疗4次,4次为一疗程,两组患者分别于治疗前、治疗后4周进行NIH-CPSI评分,并对两组患者疗效进行比较。结果治疗前2组患者的疼痛/不适评分、排尿评分、生活质量影响评分及NIH-CPSI总分组间均无统计学差异(P>0.05)。两组治疗后疼痛/不适评分、排尿评分、生活质量影响评分及NIH-CPSI总分较治疗前差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。治疗组治疗后的疼痛/不适评分、排尿评分、生活质量影响评分及NIH-CPSI总分下降幅度明显高于对照组治疗后下降幅度(P<0.05)。治疗组在治疗后的总有效率明显高于对照组(均P<0.05)。结论体外冲击波治疗慢性前列腺炎(IIIB)有较好的近期疗效,但其远期疗效有待进一步追踪观察。
Objective To investigate the clinical efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave in the treatment of type IIIB chronic prostatitis. Methods Thirty-two patients with chronic prostatitis of type ⅢВ were randomly divided into treatment group (n = 20) and control group (n = 12). Patients in the treatment group were given low-energy shock wave therapy. Control group given in vitro electric field hyperthermia. Two groups were treated once a week, four times in a row and four times a course of treatment. The NIH-CPSI scores of the two groups before and 4 weeks after treatment were compared, and the curative effect was compared between the two groups. Results There was no significant difference in pain / discomfort score, urinary score, quality of life impact score and NIH-CPSI total score between the two groups before treatment (P> 0.05). The post-treatment pain / discomfort scores, urination scores, quality of life impact scores and NIH-CPSI scores were significantly different between the two groups before treatment (P <0.05). The pain / discomfort score, urination score, quality of life impact score, and NIH-CPSI score in the treatment group decreased significantly after treatment compared with those in the control group (P <0.05). The total effective rate after treatment in the treatment group was significantly higher than that in the control group (all P <0.05). Conclusion Extracorporeal shock wave treatment of chronic prostatitis (IIIB) has a good short-term efficacy, but its long-term efficacy needs further follow-up observation.