A comprehensive practical review of acupoint embedding as a semi-permanent acupuncture: A mini review.

Since ancient times, acupuncture has been utilized in the treatment of lots of diseases, as a part of Traditional Chinese Medicine. Acupoint embedding (AEM) therapy, known as catgut embedding, is a development of acupuncture that consists of inserting catgut or surgical threads into specific acupoints to produce continuous acupoint stimulation based on the theory of Traditional Chinese Medicine. The remaining thread in the acupoint works as a semi-permanent acupuncture needle that results in decreasing the total time of the treatment which is required for continuous manual acupuncture sessions and increasing the treatment efficacy and patients' satisfaction. In each session of AEM about twenty 1 to 2 cm-long threads-natural origin, synthetic polymer, or bioactive threads-will be inserted at the target acupoints and this process will be repeated every 3 to 4 weeks. Indications of AEM are somehow similar to manual acupuncture including obesity, pain, musculoskeletal inflammations, infertility, etc, and it cannot be performed on pregnant women and pediatrics. AEM demonstrates its therapeutic effects via modulating immune system function, alleviating body inflammatory conditions, affecting the neurohormonal system, and other mechanisms. Subcutaneous indurations, redness, bleeding, hematoma, and bruising are some adverse events reported following the AEM. In conclusion, the scientific literature suggests that AEM is a relatively safe and convenient therapy if performed by a professional skilled practitioner.

Comparative efficacy of acupuncture, venesection, and physical therapy on chronic low back pain outcomes: a randomized clinical trial.

Objective: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) imposes considerable financial and social burden with poor response to medical and surgical treatments. Alternatively, acupuncture and venesection(Fasd) are traditionally used to alleviate nociceptive and musculoskeletal pains. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and the safety of acupuncture and venesection on CLBP and patient functionality. Methods: The current study was a single-blinded, randomized clinical trial with balanced allocation, conducted in the Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Medicine, in 2022. One hundred five CLBP patients who had no back pain-attributable structural or major diseases were randomly allocated into three parallel arms and received either physical therapy (PTG), acupuncture (APG), or venesection (VSG). Pain severity and functional aspects were evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) during the study. VAS and ODI scores were defined as the primary outcomes. Results: Ninety-five patients were reviewed in the final analysis (PTG=33, APG=30, VSG=31). Demographic data showed equal group distribution. Statistical analysis showed all procedures had reduced VAS score immediately after the first session, after the last session, and after follow-up; however, APG and VSG values were significantly lower (P<0.05). Pain reduction results in follow-up period were more sustainable in APG and VSG as compared to PTG (P<0.01). ODI results revealed global improvement after the last session of the treatment in all groups, while APG had more significant results (P<0.05). During the follow-up period, ODI still tended to decrease in VSG, non-significantly increased in APG, and significantly increased in PTG. Only two patients reported fainting after receiving venesection. Conclusion: Considering the pain and functional scores, both acupuncture and venesection can reproduce reliable results. Acupuncture and venesection both have sustained effects on pain and daily function of the patients even after treatment termination, while physical therapy had more relapse in pain and functional limitations.