Search

To explore the therapeutic effect and the mechanism of the adjuvant treatment with moxibustion on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).A total of 95 patients with COVID-19 were randomly divided into a moxibustion group (45 cases) and a basic treatment group (50 cases). The routine treatment of western medicine was applied in the patients of both groups. In the moxibustion group, on the base of the treatment of western medicine, moxibustion was applied to Dazhui (GV 14), Feishu (BL 13), Qihai (CV 6) and Zusanli (ST 36), once daily and consecutively for 14 days. At the end of treatment courses, clinical symptom scores for cough, asthmatic breathing, chest oppression and short breath, as well as their remission rates were compared between the two groups before and after treatment. Before and after treatment, the white blood cell (WBC) count, the levels of c-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) and the absolute number of T lymphocyte subsets, i.e. , and of the peripheral blood were compared in the patients between the two groups. The principal component analysis was adopted to analyze the common data extracted from the above 10 clinical indexes variables and comprehensively evaluate the differences in the therapeutic effect of two regimens.The clinical symptom scores were all decreased after treatment in both of the moxibustion group and the basic treatment group as compared with those before treatment (On the base of the routine treatment with western medicine, moxibustion therapy supplemented relieves the clinical symptoms, reduces the levels of inflammatory indexes, i.e. IL-6 and CRP as well as improves the absolute number of peripheral T lymphocyte subsets. The clinical therapeutic effect of such regimen with moxibustion supplemented is significantly better than the simple routine treatment of western medicine.

To explore the better therapy in the treatment of ganglion.Ninety cases of ganglion were randomized into a two-way quintuple puncture group, a common quintuple puncture group and a fire needling group, 30 cases in each one. In the two-way quintuple puncture group, the "9-in-1" multiple penetrating needling technique was used. In the common quintuple puncture group, the traditional "5-in-1" multiple penetrating needling technique was applied. In the fire needling group, the traditional multiple fire needling technique was adopted. The treatment was given once a day, 3 treatments made one session and the efficacy was analyzed statistically after 1 session treatment in the three groups.All of the three therapeutic methods achieved the efficacy on ganglion. The curative rate was 96. 7% (29/30) in the two-way quintuple puncture group, which was better obviously than 66.7% (20/30) in the common quintuple puncture group and 60. 0% (18/30) in the fire needling group (both P0. 01).The two-way quintuple puncture technique achieves the remarkably superior efficacy on ganglion as compared with the common quintuple puncture technique and fire needling technique.