WFU
顯示具有 shockwave 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 shockwave 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2026年2月23日 星期一

體外震波治療男性力不從心相關迷思 Common Myths About Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Erectile Dysfunction

 

1.    男性力不從心,只能靠吃藥,而且不可能根治?

Is male impotence something that can only be treated with medication, and is it impossible to cure completely?

https://youtu.be/1Qw1G5_k_SA?si=VgvgAVu5tjlLM5rz

 

https://uroprolo.blogspot.com/2023/05/blog-post.html

https://uroprolo.blogspot.com/2023/05/can-erectile-dysfunction-be-treated.html

 

2.    年輕人也需要震波治療嗎?

Do young men also need shockwave therapy?

https://youtube.com/shorts/3-6gWlnkn18?si=KO0xAfMhCvOp-oJy

 

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1C3jaFZ1yD/?mibextid=wwXIfr

 

3.    要打幾次才會有效?打的越痛、效果就越好嗎?

How many treatment sessions are needed to see results?
Is more pain associated with better outcomes?

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1DF6DU2G6s/?mibextid=wwXIfr

 

https://uroprolo.blogspot.com/2023/05/blog-post.html

https://uroprolo.blogspot.com/2023/05/can-erectile-dysfunction-be-treated.html

 

4.    是不是發數越多、能量越強,效果就越好?

Do higher pulse counts and stronger energy levels lead to better results?

 

https://youtube.com/shorts/GonfQTmipoo?si=dWiS7y6vH4hneHOg

 

https://uroprolo.blogspot.com/2024/08/blog-post.html

https://uroprolo.blogspot.com/2024/08/extracorporeal-shock-wave-therapy-more.html

 

5.    有哪一臺震波機器效果特別好嗎?打的越深效果就越好嗎?

Is there any shockwave machine that works particularly better?
Does deeper penetration mean better effectiveness?

http://youtube.com/shorts/TXFj7bwe6W8

 

https://uroprolo.blogspot.com/2026/02/blog-post_23.html

https://uroprolo.blogspot.com/2026/02/if-shockwave-therapy-is-effective-for.html

 

 

If Shockwave Therapy Is Effective for Erectile Dysfunction, Is There One Machine That Works Better Than the Others?


Short answer: No.


First of all, Dr. Huang has personally used the three types of extracorporeal shockwave systems mentioned below, and all have demonstrated good clinical outcomes. None has been shown to be superior to the others.


More importantly, based on current evidence-based medicine:

🔹 Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) can be broadly divided into focused and radial types. In the treatment of male erectile dysfunction, focused shockwave therapy is generally the primary modality used.

🔹 Focused shockwave therapy can be further categorized into three main types:

  • Electromagnetic (EM)
  • Piezoelectric (PE)
  • Electrohydraulic (EH)

All three modalities have been shown to be effective in treating erectile dysfunction. At present, there are no head-to-head comparative studies demonstrating that one type is more effective than the others. Therefore, patients do not need to overly focus on differences between machines; any device approved by the Ministry of Health and Welfare for the appropriate indication can be considered a valid treatment option.


📌 Key Points from Current Evidence

1.    Low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (LI-ESWT) has evidence supporting its ability to improve vasculogenic erectile dysfunction (ED) by enhancing blood flow and promoting tissue repair.

2.    Most systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials focus on the effectiveness of LI-ESWT itself, rather than on specific brands or machine models.

3.    Some studies compare different shockwave modalities (focused vs radial), but because these techniques are fundamentally different, the overall body of evidence remains limited.


📌 Current Published Medical Literature

(PubMed / Systematic Reviews / Cochrane Reviews)

There are no randomized controlled trials or meta-analyses that directly compare different focused shockwave systems and demonstrate the superiority of one over another.


📌 Therefore, the Evidence Can Be Summarized as Follows:

✅ Low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (LI-ESWT) is effective for treating vasculogenic erectile dysfunction and certain chronic tendon or soft-tissue conditions.
❓ Is any specific shockwave system better than the others? → There is currently no strong clinical evidence to support such a claim.


📌 In Clinical Practice, When Treating Erectile Dysfunction, Physicians Are Often More Concerned About:

👉 What treatment options are available and suitable for the individual patient
👉 Whether the patient’s lifestyle factors (diet, exercise, smoking, alcohol use) are beneficial or harmful
👉 The presence of chronic diseases and how well they are controlled
👉 The patient’s ability to adhere to treatment in order to achieve optimal outcomes


References

https://uroweb.org/guidelines/sexual-and-reproductive-health/chapter/management-of-erectile-dysfunction

https://www.auanet.org/guidelines-and-quality/guidelines/erectile-dysfunction-(ed)-guideline


Postscript

🔹 The motivation for writing this article comes from the fact that many clinics claim their shockwave machines are superior to others. While self-promotion is understandable, as a medical professional I feel obligated to state the facts—especially when certain heavily advertised shockwave systems claim to be “more effective than other shockwaves,” a statement that is not supported by medical evidence. Someone has to clarify this.

🔹 If it were merely advertising, I might not have noticed. However, a large number of patients repeatedly ask me about these claims and even show me the advertisements they have seen. Because this has become so common, I decided to write this article to address the issue directly.

🔹 “Axxa Duo” is an electrohydraulic shockwave system. There is currently no clinical evidence demonstrating that Axxa Duo is more effective or superior to other shockwave therapies.

  

2024年8月27日 星期二

Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy: More is Not Always Better – A Focus on Erectile Dysfunction

 

Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (LI-ESWT) has become one of the standard treatment options for erectile dysfunction (ED) in men. 

The principle behind this therapy is that the energy from shock waves promotes local angiogenesis and improves microcirculation, thereby enhancing erectile function. 

However, as the application of shock wave therapy becomes more widespread, I frequently encounter a common question from patients in my clinic: Is more always better when it comes to the number of shock wave pulses used in treatment?

 

l  The Impact of Pulse Numbers

According to a systematic review and meta-analysis published in 2022, which included 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 1,064 patients, the efficacy of LI-ESWT in treating ED was examined alongside the influence of different treatment parameters.

The study categorized the RCTs into three groups based on the number of pulses per treatment session:

  • 600 pulses
  • 1,500 to 2,000 pulses
  • More than 3,000 pulses

 

Results for the 600-pulse group: Compared to the control group, the treatment group showed an increase in the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) score, but the difference was not statistically significant (MD = 1.50, 95% CI = [-1.44, 4.43], p = .32).

 

Results for the 1,500 to 2,000-pulse group: The treatment group showed a significant increase in IIEF score (MD = 4.80, 95% CI = [2.61, 7.00], p < .0001).

 

Results for the group with more than 3,000 pulses: Although this group also showed a statistically significant improvement in IIEF compared to the control group (MD = 3.46, 95% CI = [1.89, 5.03], p < .0001), interestingly, the results were slightly lower than those seen in the 1,500 to 2,000-pulse group.



l  The Impact of Energy Density

The study further categorized the RCTs into two groups based on energy density settings:

  • 0.09 mJ/mm²
  • 0.1 to 0.2 mJ/mm²

The results indicated that both energy density settings could significantly improve the IIEF scores. 

However, the group with a higher energy density (0.1 to 0.2 mJ/mm²) showed slightly lower effectiveness compared to the group with a lower energy setting (0.09 mJ/mm²). Specifically:

  • 0.09 mJ/mm²: MD = 3.81, 95% CI = [2.07, 5.55], p < .0001
  • 0.1 to 0.2 mJ/mm²: MD = 3.01, 95% CI = [0.89, 5.12], p = .005

 


l  Conclusion of the Study

This study not only reaffirms the effectiveness of LI-ESWT in treating ED but also highlights the varying effects of different energy densities and pulse numbers on erectile function. The study found that:

  • An energy density of 0.09 mJ/mm² led to greater improvement in IIEF scores compared to an energy density between 0.1 to 0.2 mJ/mm².
  • Treatment with 1,500 or 2,000 pulses per session resulted in greater improvement than with 600 or 3,000 pulses.
  • Patients with moderate ED showed more significant improvements in IIEF than those with mild or severe ED after LI-ESWT treatment.
  • The degree of improvement in IIEF also varied with follow-up time, with greater improvements observed at 6 months compared to 1 or 3 months of follow-up. 


l  Dr. Huang's Commentary:

From a theoretical standpoint, it's clear that simply increasing the number of shock wave pulses or the energy level does not necessarily lead to better results. 

The purpose of shock wave therapy is to "induce" the body's self-repair and regenerative capabilities. 

Therefore, as long as an adequate amount is applied to achieve this "induction," it is sufficient. 

Applying more than necessary has no added benefit.

Therefore, I urge that when using LI-ESWT to treat ED, the treatment efficacy does not increase indefinitely with the number of pulses or energy level. 

Physicians should carefully select appropriate pulse parameters to ensure both the effectiveness and safety of the treatment. 

For patients with severe ED or those unresponsive to other treatments, it is also important not to blindly increase the number of pulses but to consider combining other adjunctive therapies. 

Patients should understand that the key to successful treatment lies not in the quantity of shock waves but in a treatment plan tailored by the physician to their specific condition, ensuring better outcomes and treatment experiences.

 

 References: 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8949743/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10890328/

 

 

2024年5月14日 星期二

體外震波-比傳統復健有效且免打針的治療-下背痛篇

 

下背痛是個盛行率相當高的疾病

根據統計

約八成的成人在一生中都曾經有過下背痛的困擾

 

下背痛的治療方式很多元

從傳統保守治療(運動訓練、物理治療、藥物治療等)

到具有侵入性的治療(針灸、乾針、激痛點注射、增生療法注射治療)

乃至嚴重時需要的手術治療

然而

對於有頑固下背痛疾病但又還不需開刀/不想開刀的病人

傳統保守治療效果不佳

侵入性治療又望之卻步

有沒有其他治療選擇呢?

 

答案是有的!

那就是體外震波!

 

體外震波由於其刺激組織修復再生、緩解疼痛的特性

在骨復健領域的應用廣泛

傳統上

震波治療的適應症

以四肢淺層的組織為主(ex:上下肢肌腱病變、足底筋膜炎...)

但事實上
有越來越多的臨床證據顯示

體外震波在治療身體中軸、較深層相關病變亦有相當療效

今天

黃醫師就帶大家瀏覽一下

目前體外震波治療下背痛的醫學證據以及臨床效果如何

 

1.Extracorporeal shock wave therapy for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Medicine (Baltimore). 2023 Dec 29;102(52):e36596. (IF: 1.552)

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38206739/

 

這是一篇回顧性研究

從六百多篇體外震波治療下背痛相關文獻

篩選出22 個隨機對照研究、共1749名患者

進行統合分析

比較體外震波跟其他療法治療下背痛的效果

 

治療組:體外震波治療

對照組:包含運動療法、激痛點注射、超音波療法、熱療法、電療、磁熱振動、針灸、口服藥物(Kinesitherapy, Trigger point injection, Ultrasound therapy, Thermal therapy, TENS, Magneto-thermo- vibration, acupuncture, Oral drugs)

另外這篇研究還特別整理出各文獻下背痛的病因(pathogenesis)

比如肌筋膜與韌帶、薦髂關節、椎間盤、椎體、小面關節 (Myofascia and ligaments, SI joint, Intervertebral disc, vertebral body, Facet joint)

 

結果:

跟對照組相比

體外震波治療下背痛

疼痛VAS, ODI 殘障指數和Beck 憂鬱量表分數較低

指地距離較短

日本骨科協會評分JOAs較高

 

3 個月追蹤時

VAS 和 ODI 仍較低

不良反應較少

有效病例更多

 

結論:

與其他療法相比

體外震波治療下背痛在改善疼痛、功能障礙和心理狀況方面具有有效性和安全性

在長期療效方面顯示出優勢

 

2.Efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shockwave therapy in chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 632 patients 

J Orthop Surg Res. 2023; 18: 455. (IF: 2.677)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10290808/

 

一樣是體外震波對下背痛治療的回顧性研究

與上一篇不同的是

這篇聚焦在「慢性下背痛」(下背痛超過三個月)

 

本篇從180多篇文獻

篩選出12 個隨機對照研究、共632名患者

進行統合分析

比較體外震波跟其他療法治療慢性下背痛的效果

 

治療組:體外震波

對照組:運動- 體能訓練、伸展練習(膕繩肌、髂腰肌和背部伸肌)、橋式...

雷射治療、激痛點注射、肌肉注射(0 mg triamcinolone + 2 mL lidocaine 2%)、熱敷、超音波與電療、肌筋膜激痛療法、口服藥物。

(Exercise - Physical exercise, Stretching exercises (hamstrings, iliopsoas, and back extensors), Bridging, adductor ball squeeze, abdominal marching, reverse curl-ups exercise (50 min), Williams’ exercises and McKenzie’s exercise

Laser therapeutic, Trigger point injection, muscle injection (40 mg triamcinolone + 2 mL lidocaine 2%), Hot packs, ultrasound and electrotherapy, Myofascial trigger therapy, Oral medications,.)

 

結果:

與其他傳統治療相比

體外震波治療下背痛

疼痛、 ODI 殘障指數顯著改善

 

結論:

與其他治療措施相比

體外震波可以更好地緩解疼痛並改善腰椎功能障礙

且沒有嚴重不良反應

 

3.Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Treating Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Biomed Res Int. 2021 Nov 15:2021:5937250. 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34840977/

 

比前兩篇更早的回顧性研究

本篇篩選出10 個隨機對照試驗、共 455 名年輕至中年患者(29.2-55.8 歲)

統合分析比較體外震波跟其他療法治療慢性下背痛的效果

結論:慢性下背痛患者使用體外震波可在短期內顯著且可量化地減少疼痛和殘疾

 

 

黃醫師結語:

對於廣大下背痛的族群

傳統保守治療(運動訓練、物理治療、藥物治療)仍是目前治療的主力

然而

傳統保守治療有以下缺點─

運動訓練:姿勢不標準、堅持性差

物理治療:難達到長期鎮痛效果

藥物治療:可能伴隨噁心、便秘、疲倦等副作用

而侵入性治療並不是每個病人都能接受

因此

效果更好又不具侵入性的治療

是許多病人心裡的渴望

 

體外震波是再生治療的主力之一

除了促進組織修復及止痛的特性

又不具有針劑的侵入性

可譽為「不打針的PRP」

除了骨復健領域

泌尿科也有廣泛的應用(包括男性勃起功能障礙的治療)

 

傳統上

體外震波治療以四肢淺層組織為主

原因是可以較容易地將震波聚集在欲治療的標的(target)

而下背痛牽涉的組織病變從淺層到深層都有可能

範圍也較廣(從肋骨下緣到屁股下緣)

因此增加了震波治療的難度

不過即使如此

初步的研究依然肯定了體外震波在下背痛的療效

黃醫師認為

如何將治療過程更優化

達到更精準、更有效的治療

將是未來研究的重點

也呼籲所有下背痛的病患

現代醫學已有相當多元的治療方式

及早接受治療、選擇適合自己的治療方式

就能儘早恢復健康、讓疼痛遠離!

 

門診資訊