OBJECTIVETo assess the clinical efficacy on adhesive ileus treated by electroacupuncture (EA) at Zhigou (TE 6) and Zusanli (ST 36), and to explore the different effects of acupoint and non-acupoint.

METHODSForty cases were randomized into an acupoint group and a non-acupoint group, 20 cases in each one. At the same time of the basic treatment, in the acupoint group, EA was applied at bilateral Zhigou (TE 6) and Zusanli (ST 36). In the non-acupoint group, EA was applied at the sites (that were neither on any meridian nor belonged to any acupoint) that were 0.5 to 1 cm lateral to Zhigou (TE 6) and Zusanli (ST 36) on both sides. Acupuncture was given twice a day, lasting for 4 days totally. The situation of abdominal pain, the time for the improvement in abdominal distention, the time of first voluntary defecation, the time of solid food intake and the others were observed.

RESULTSIn the acupoint group, the abdominal pain and distention were relieved rapidly as compared with those in the non-acupoint group. The results of the assessment face scale (AFS), the first anal exhaust time [(51.35 +/- 32.40) h vs (101.85 +/- 53.87) h], the first defecation time [(82.70 +/- 57.27) h vs (154.70 +/- 145.28) h] and the first solid food intake time [(119.65 +/- 56. 16) h vs (231.95 +/- 180.89) h] were all remarkably improved as compared with those in the non-acupoint group, presenting the statistical significance (P<0.05, P<0.01). Concerning the case number for the conversion to surgery, the death number and the number for the re-admission in 1 year follow-up visit, there was no significant difference in statistics between two groups (all P>0.05). But, the data suggested that the results were improved in tendency in the acupoint group.

CONCLUSIONEA at Zhigou (TE 6) and Zusanli (ST 36) achieves the good clinical efficacy on adhesive ileus. This therapy can remarkably improve abdominal pain and distention and promote the intestinal peristalsis for the patients and is superior to EA at non-acupoint.