Yaotongdian (EX-UE 7) Acupuncture

Ying Cao et al. (2025) · QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians

This randomized trial with 84 emergency department patients explored whether acupuncture started right away, before a diagnosis is confirmed, eases the pain of suspected renal colic, the sudden, severe cramping pain in the back or abdomen that usually comes from a kidney or urinary stone. Imaging to confirm a stone takes time while patients are in extreme pain, and the authors note that the usual painkillers have drawbacks: anti-inflammatory drugs can raise heart risk with higher doses and longer use, and opioids cause side effects including nausea, drowsiness and dependence concerns. Acupuncture, a traditional Chinese medicine technique that places thin needles at specific body points, had already been reported by this group to reduce pain in confirmed cases. Adults aged 18 to 80 with one-sided colicky pain and tenderness over the kidney area, and pain of at least 4 on a 0 to 10 scale, were treated at a Beijing hospital emergency department. Half received needles in the back of both hands at Yaotongdian, a point the authors use for lumbar pain, with the needles lifted and rotated until a soreness or heaviness sensation appeared and then left in for 30 minutes. The other half had very shallow needling with tiny short needles at spots that are not acupuncture points, with no manipulation. Ten minutes after needling, 64.3% of the acupuncture group (27 of 42) had at least halved their pain, versus 16.7% of the sham group (7 of 42), a 47.6 percentage point gap (P < 0.01, so chance is very unlikely to explain it). By 30 minutes the figures were 85.7% versus 31.0%. Average pain scores at 10 minutes were 3.38 versus 6.00. Fewer acupuncture patients needed an analgesic injection by 30 minutes (33.3% vs 59.5%; P = 0.03) and satisfaction scores were higher (4.69 vs 3.69). Patients, outcome assessors and statisticians did not know the group, and patients guessed their group at similar rates, so the blinding held. Surgery and return visits did not differ between groups, and each group had one adverse event (bleeding with acupuncture; nausea and vomiting with sham). The authors suggest that early acupuncture is a safe option for pain relief while a diagnosis is awaited and that it did not appear to interfere with later care. The authors also note that a single acupuncture point may give limited improvement in critically ill patients. They state plainly that the study was done at one center with experienced acupuncturists, included only 3 acupuncture-group patients who turned out not to have a urinary stone, and did not analyze results by stone size. They call for multicenter confirmation.

Jian-Feng Tu et al. (2022) · JAMA network open

This randomized trial with 80 emergency department patients explored whether adding acupuncture to a standard painkiller injection brings faster relief from renal colic, the severe cramping flank pain that occurs when a kidney stone blocks or moves through the urinary tract. Renal colic is described by the authors as one of the worst types of pain, and the guideline first-choice drugs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medicines such as diclofenac, take time to work: in an earlier study, 37.5% of patients still had moderate or severe pain 15 minutes after an injection. Acupuncture, a traditional Chinese medicine technique that inserts thin needles at specific body points, had shown quick pain reduction in other settings. Adults aged 18 to 75 with stone-related renal colic and pain of at least 4 out of 10 on a visual analog scale (a line on which patients mark their pain) were treated at a Beijing hospital emergency department in 2020. Everyone received a 50 mg diclofenac injection into the muscle. Half then had 30 minutes of needling at Yaotongdian, a point on the back of each hand, with the needles twisted and lifted until a soreness or heaviness sensation (called De qi) appeared. The other half had shallow needle pricks at forearm spots that are not acupuncture points. Ten minutes after needling, 77.5% of the acupuncture group (31 of 40) had at least halved their pain score, compared with 10.0% of the sham group (4 of 40), a gap of 67.5 percentage points (P < .001, so chance is very unlikely to explain it). Average pain fell to 3.0 versus 5.9 out of 10. Acupuncture also led at 0, 5, 15, 20 and 30 minutes (97.5% vs 80.0% at 30 minutes; P = .03). Patients, assessors and the statistician did not know the group, and patients guessed their group about equally often in both arms (P = .48). The advantage faded as the injection took effect: by 45 and 60 minutes both groups had about 92% to 98% responding (P = .62), and only 1 patient needed stronger rescue medication. No adverse events were recorded. The authors suggest acupuncture may serve as an optional add-on for faster relief, since it uses a single point and needs no individual diagnosis. They attribute the absence of a rescue-medication difference to a possible ceiling effect from the diclofenac. They note limitations plainly: one hospital, treatment given after diagnostic imaging, experienced acupuncturists who could not be blinded, and no follow-up of pain beyond 60 minutes or analysis by stone size. They plan to study acupuncture before imaging.