Akupunktur
DZ A
Originalia | original articles
D O I : 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . d z a . 2 0 0 8 . 1 0 . 0 0 1     6     D t Z t s c h r f A k u p. 5 1 , 4 / 2 0 0 8
P. T. Dorsher 1, J. Fleckenstein 2
Trigger Points and Classical Acupuncture Points
Part 2: Clinical Correspondences in Treating Pain and Somatovisceral Disorders
Trigger-Punkte und klassische Akupunkturpunkte
Teil 2: Klinische Korrespondenzen in der Behandlung von Schmerzen und
somatoviszeralen Störungen
Abstract
Background: Anatomic comparisons of the locations of
myofascial trigger points (mTrPs) to those of classical acu-
puncture points in the first part of this study showed that
at least 238 (93.3 %) of 255 “common” mTrPs described
by the Trigger Point Manual have proximate, anatomically
corresponding classical acupoints that anatomy references
document enter the same muscle regions of those mTrPs.
Objectives: To determine whether these correlated com-
mon mTrP–classical acupoint pairs have similar indica-
tions for treating pain and somatovisceral disorders.
Methods: The clinical indications of the 238 anatomically
corresponding classical acupoints were examined in acu-
puncture references to determine whether they include in-
dications for treating pain and/or somatovisceral disorders
that are comparable to those described for their correlated
common mTrPs by the Trigger Point Manual.
Results: 93 % (221/238) of the correlated common mTrPs
have pain indications described by the Trigger Point Ma-
nual. Of their anatomically corresponding classical acu-
points, 208/221 (94 %) have similar regional pain indi-
cations described, and another 6 (3 %) of these acupoints
have indications for painful conditions in the distributions
of their correlated mTrPs’ described referred-pain. Only
7 classical acupoints that anatomically corresponded to
common mTrPs had no comparable pain indications. The
Trigger Point Manual describes somatovisceral effects for
60 (24 %) of its common mTrPs. Of their anatomically
corresponding classical acupoints, 82 % (49/60) have “de-
finite” and another 11 % (7/60) have “probable” clinical
correspondences of their somatovisceral effects.
Conclusions: The marked correspondences of the pain in-
dications (up to 97 %) and somatovisceral indications (up
to 93 %) of anatomically corresponding common mTrP-
classical acupoint pairs provide a second, clinical line of
evidence that trigger points and acupuncture points likely
describe the same physiologic phenomena.
Keywords
Acupuncture, acupuncture point, myofascial pain, trigger
point therapy
Peter T. Dorsher, MD 4500 San Pablo Road
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Jacksonville, FL 32224
Mayo Clinic dorsher.peter@mayo.edu
1 From the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
2 and the Interdisciplinary Pain Center, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Munich
Deutsche Zeitschrift für
Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund: Der Vergleich der Lokalisationen myofaszialer
Triggerpunkte (mTrPs) mit der von klassischen Akupunktur-
punkten im ersten Teil dieser Studie zeigte, das mindestens
238 (93,3 %) der 255 „allgemeinen“ mTrPs, die im Trigger
Point Manual beschrieben werden, mit in ihrer Nähe gelegenen
Akupunkturpunkten dieselben Muskelregionen versorgen.
Zielsetzung: Festzustellen, ob diese Korrelations-Paare
aus mTrP und klasssischen Akupunkturpunkten ähnliche
Indikationen zur Behandlung von Schmerzen und somato-
viszeralen Störungen besitzen.
Methoden: Die klinischen Indikationen der 238 anatomisch
korrespondierenden klassischen Akupunkturpunkte wurden
daraufhin untersucht, ob ihre Indiaktionen für die Therapie
von Schmerzen und/oder somatoviszeralen mit den Indika-
tionen für die mTrP des Trigger Point Manual korrelieren.
Ergebnisse: 93 % (221/238) der korrelierenden allgemei-
nen mTrPs des Trigger Point Manual besitzen Schmerz-
Indikationen. Für 208/221 (94 %) der mit ihnen korrelie-
renden klassischen Akupunktupunkte werden ähnliche
regionale Schmerz-Indikationen angegeben. Weitere sechs
(3 %) dieser Akupunkturpunkte besitzen Schmerz-Indika-
tionen für die Regionen des übertragenen Schmerzes der
korrelierenden mTrPs. Nur 7 klassische Akupunkturpunkte,
die mit mTrPs korrelieren, haben keine vergleichbare
Schmerz-Indikation. Das Trigger Point Manual beschreibt
somatoviszerale Effekte für 60 (24 %) der allgemeinen
mTrPs. 82 % (49/60) der mit ihnen anatomisch korrelie-
renden klassischen Akupunkturpunkte haben sichere, wei-
tere 11 % (7/60) wahrscheinliche korrespondierende soma-
toviszerale Effekte.
Schlussfolgerungen: Die deutliche Übereinstimmung der
Schmerz-Indikationen (bis zu 97%) und somatoviszeralen
Indikationen (bis zu 93 %) der Paare der anatomisch korre-
spondierenden allgemeinen mTrPs mit klassischen Akupunk-
turpunkten liefern einen zweiten klinischen Beweis, dass Trig-
gerpunkte und Akupunkturpunkte mit hoher Wahrscheinlich-
keit dieselben physiologischen Phänomene beschreiben.
Schlüsselwörter
Akupunktur, Akupunkturpunkt, myofaszialer Schmerz,
Triggerpunkttherapie

P. T . D o r s h e r , J . F l e c k e n s t e i n Trigger Points and Classical Acupuncture Points
Introduction
Less than 30 % of the acupuncture literature is devoted
to its use in the treatment of pain conditions [1], yet
this is likely its most familiar indication to the public
and allopathic physicians. All but 2 of the 361 classical
acupuncture points do have pain indications described
[2–4], with the exceptions being points BL-8 and ST-
17 (the latter point has no clinical indications). Thus,
though their pain uses are often not their primary cli-
nical indications, virtually every classical acupuncture
point has at least one indication for treating pain disor-
ders that derives from thousands of years of accumulated
clinical experience.
Trigger point therapy is primarily used to treat myofascial
pain and dysfunction, and continues to be a widely used
pain treatment method in contemporary medical practice
both by primary care physicians and pain management
specialists [7, 8].
The qualitative and quantitative comparisons of the ana-
tomic locations of common mTrPs and classical acupoints
in the first part of the present study [9] demonstrated
that at least 93.3 % (238/255) of common mTrP regions
delineated in the Trigger Point Manual [5, 6] have ana-
tomic correspondence with classical acupoints. Anatomic
correspondence was defined as being present when a
classical acupoint was proximate to a common mTrP and
demonstrated by anatomic references to enter the same
muscle region of that trigger point. Another 6 common
mTrPs demonstrated anatomic and physiologic (referred-
pain) relationships to the acupuncture meridians coursing
over them, though there were no proximate classical acu-
points. If these mTrPs were considered as corresponding,
then the anatomic correspondence of common mTrPs and
classical acupoints rises to nearly 96 %. The quantitative
analysis of the anatomic proximity of correlated common
mTrP- classical acupoint pairs produced estimates that
82 % of these point pairs are located within 2 cm of each
other, and 95 % within 3 cm of each other. Though this
high degree of anatomic correspondence found between
common mTrPs and classical acupoints is unlikely to oc-
cur by chance, skeptics might still raise this possibility to
challenge the correspondences of the myofascial pain and
acupuncture traditions in treating pain. If it can be de-
monstrated that these anatomically corresponding trigger
points and acupuncture points also have marked similari-
ty of their clinical uses and/or physiologic properties (re-
ferred-pain and meridian distributions), then this would
provide corroborating clinical and physiologic evidence
that trigger points and acupoints likely describe the same
clinical phenomena. This in turn would suggest that the
myofascial pain tradition likely represents an indepen-
dent discovery of the acupuncture tradition’s findings in
the treatment of pain disorders.
The purpose of the second part of this study is to compare
the acupuncture and myofascial pain traditions’ clinical
indications both in the treatment of pain and somatovis-
ceral disorders.
Originalia | original articles
Methods
The clinical indications described in three authoritative acu-
puncture references [2–4] for each of the 238 anatomically
correlated classical acupuncture points from the first part of
this study [9] were examined for their uses in treating pain
disorders. Since the main purpose of this study is specifically
to compare the acupuncture and myofascial pain traditions
in the treatment of pain disorders, pain was not required to
be the primary indication of a given classical acupuncture
point as long as that acupoint had a pain indication descri-
bed by one or more of those acupuncture references.
For the analysis of the somatovisceral correspondences of the
acupuncture and myofascial pain traditions, the somatovis-
ceral effects of common mTrPs described in the Trigger Point
Manual [5, 6] were compiled. The somatovisceral indications
described by acupuncture references [2–4] for the classical
acupoints that anatomically corresponded to those mTrPs
were examined for similarities in their clinical effects.
Results
Of the 238 common mTrPs that anatomically corresponded
to a classical acupoint in the first part of this study [ 9],
221 (93 %) have pain indications described in the Trigger
Point Manual [5, 6]. There are 17 common mTrP regions
that have no pain indications described- only somatovis-
ceral effects. These include the pectoralis major “cardiac
arrythmia”, the abdominal external oblique “belch but-
ton”, and 15 lower abdominal wall musculature “causes
diarrhea” mTrP regions [5, 6].
Another 43 common mTrP regions also have somatovisce-
ral effects described by the Trigger Point Manual [5, 6] that
are distinct from their regional pain indications (Table 1).
Thus, a total of 60 common mTrP regions have somatovis-
ceral effects described.
Pain Correspondences
Comparable regional musculoskeletal or neurologic (“inter-
costal neuralgia”, for example) pain indications are descri-
bed for 208 (94 %) of the 221 anatomically corresponding
classical acupuncture points [2–4]. Another 6 (3 %) of the
classical acupoints have clinical indications for other pain-
ful conditions in the distributions of their anatomically cor-
responding mTrPs’ referred pain (Table 2). Overall, then, up
to 214/221 (~97 %) of classical acupoints have clinical pain
indications that are comparable to those described for their
anatomically corresponding common trigger point regions.
Only 3 % (7/221) of mTrPs had clinical pain indications that
differed from those of their anatomically corresponding clas-
sical acupuncture points. This represented 6 distinct classical
acupoints (LI-17, LR-3, LR-9, MH-4, SP-8, and SP-11).
Somatovisceral Correlations
The Trigger Point Manual [5, 6] describes somatovisceral ef-
fects for 60 common mTrP regions, which represents nearly
25 % of all trigger points outlined in that text. 17/60 (28 %) of
D t Z t s c h r f A k u p. 5 1 , 4 / 2 0 0 8     7     D Z A
 Akupunktur

DZ A
Deutsche Zeitschrift für
Originalia | original articles

those common mTrP regions have only non-painful, soma-
tovisceral indications described [5, 6], as outlined above. The
“causes diarrhea” trigger point regions represent 15 of those
regions; and as demonstrated in Figure 1, those common
mTrP regions are located in the distribution of the Spleen
and Stomach meridians over the lower anterior abdominal
wall musculature. These common mTrPs are proximate to
classical acupoints SP-13 and SP-14 laterally and ST-27,
ST-28, and ST-29 medially. Table 3 delineates the gastro-
intestinal disorder indications of these classical acupoints
[2–4]. Note that some of these acupoints have indications for
both constipation and enteritis. A clinician can theoretically
produce opposite clinical effects at a given acupoint depen-
ding on how the needle is manipulated there.
Overall, the somatovisceral indications of 49/60 (82 %)
of common mTrP regions were definitely comparable to
those of their anatomically corresponding classical acu-
points, and another 7 (11 %) of anatomically correspon-
ding common mTrP- classical acupoint pairs had probab-
le corresponding somatovisceral effects (Table 4). Only 4
(7 %) point pairs had no correlation of their somatovisceral
effects (Table 5).

Table 1 Somatovisceral Effects of Myofascial Trigger digastric, posterior belly difficulty swallowing
Points That Also Have Pain Indications
splenius capitis “ache inside the skull”,
Trigger Point Muscle Region Somatovisceral Effect vertex headache

trapezius, mid-point upper
portion
sternocleidomastoid, ster-
nal head, middle portion,
inferior
dizziness and “vertigo”
“sore throat”
splenius cervicis,
upper portion
rectus capitis posterior major
“ache inside the skull“,
blurred near vision, diffuse
pain inside head focusing
behind the eye
“headache ghosts”

sternocleidomastoid, sternal
head, lower portion
sternocleidomastoid, clavicu- postural dizziness & less often
lar head, lower portion
sternocleidomastoid, sternal
head, middle portion, su-
perior
sternocleidomastoid, clavicu- postural dizziness & less
lar head, middle portion
sternocleidomastoid, clavicu- postural dizziness & less
lar head, upper portion
sternocleidomastoid, sternal
head, upper portion
masseter, superficial layer,
upper portion, anterior
masseter, superficial layer,
upper portion, posterior
masseter, superficial layer,
middle portion, anterior
masseter, superficial layer,
middle portion, posterior
masseter, deep layer
temporalis, anterior portion
temporalis, middle portion,
anterior
temporalis, middle portion,
posterior
lateral pterygoid, superior
portion
lateral pterygoid, inferior
portion
paroxysmal dry cough
vertigo
“sore throat”
often vertigo
often vertigo
“sore throat”
posterior upper teeth pain
posterior upper teeth pain
posterior lower teeth pain
posterior lower teeth pain
tinnitus
maxillary incisor pain
pain in maxillary teeth
just behind incisor
(“intermediate teeth“)
posterior maxillary teeth pain
“sinusitis”
“sinusitis”
obliquus capitis inferior “headache ghosts”
pectoralis major, intermedi- “heart attack”
ate sternal section, upper
pectoralis major, intermedi- “heart attack”
ate sternal section, middle
pectoralis major, intermedi- “heart attack”
ate sternal section, lower
pectoralis major, lateral free breast pain
margin, medial
pectoralis major, lateral free breast pain
margin, lateral
pectoralis major, parasternal “heart attack”
section, upper
pectoralis major, parasternal “heart attack”
section, lower
pectoralis minor, upper mimics cardiac ischemia
pectoralis minor, lower mimics cardiac ischemia
sternalis mimics cardiac ischemia
serratus anterior “short of breath”
iliocostalis thoracis, mimics cardiac
mid-thoracic level ischemia or pleurisy
external oblique, anterior “heartburn”
upper portion
external oblique, anterior “inguinal and testicular
middle portion pain, lower quadrant
abdominal pain”
external oblique, anterior “inguinal and testicular
lower portion pain, lower quadrant
abdominal pain”
rectus abdominus, upper “abdominal fullness, nausea,
portion and vomitting”

D Z A     8     D t Z t s c h r f A k u p. 5 1 , 4 / 2 0 0 8
 Originalia | original articles
P. T . D o r s h e r , J . F l e c k e n s t e i n Trigger Points and Classical Acupuncture Points

Other musculoskeletal effects of trigger point regions were

described for 15 regions which are generally non-painful
(Table 6), and the indications of their anatomically corre-
sponding classical acupoints demonstrated definite or pro-
bable agreement for 11/13 (85 %) of these point pairs.

Discussion

Melzack et al. [10] reported a 100 % anatomic correspon-

dence of 48 trigger points with 50 acupuncture points tradi-
tionally used to treat pain disorders but found their clinical
correspondence in treating pain disorders was somewhat
lower (71 %). In reality, however, if the data of Melzack et
al’s study [10] is carefully examined, then at least 9 and
probably 14 of their 15 “negative” mTrP-acupoint clinical
Figure 1. The “Causes Diarrhea” Trigger Point Regions & Their Relationships
to the Principal Meridians with their Classical Acupuncture Points
Table 2 Acupoints With Clinical Pain Indications in the (adapted from Primal Pictures images, with permission)
Distribution of Their Anatomically Correspon-
ding Trigger Points’ Referred-Pain Table 4 “Probable” Agreement Between Somatovisce-
ral Indications of Trigger Points and Classical
Trigger Point Muscle Corres- Acupuncture Point
Acupuncture Points
Region ponding Pain Indication(s)
Acupoint Trigger Point Myofascial Classical Acupoint
Muscle Region Indication Acupoint Indication
sphincter ani, GV-1 hemorrhoid pain,
superior region heaviness of sacrum temporalis, middle posterior GB-7 used to treat tooth
(perianal referred pain) portion, posterior upper decay with ST-42
tooth pain
sphincter ani, GV-1 hemorrhoid pain,
lateral region heaviness of sacrum lateral pterygoid, “sinusitis” ST-7 pain/swelling of
(perianal referred pain) upper cheek
levator ani GV-1 hemorrhoids, anal lateral pterygoid, “sinusitis” ST-7 pain/swelling of
(perianal referred pain) prolapse, lumbar pain lower cheek
gluteus medius, medial BL-27 testicular pain radia-
lower abdominal “causes ST-28 distension abdo-
region (referred pain to ting to lumbar region
obliques, right diarrhea” men, retention
ipsilateral low lumbar
feces
region & medial buttock)
adductor magnus, BL-36 difficult urination or lower abdominal “causes ST-28 distension
upper region (referred defecation, hemor- obliques, left diarrhea” abdomen, retenti-
pain into pelvis) rhoids, cold in uterus on feces

soleus, exceptional point GB-35 facial swelling, soleus “exceptio- pain to GB-35 swelling of face/
(referred pain to leg pain nal” lower jaw and eyes, throat pain-
ipsilateral face & jaw) portion, lateral cheek ful obstruction

Table 3 “Causes Diarrhea” Trigger Points and Gastrointestinal Indications of their Anatomically Corresponding Classical Acupoints
(D = Deadman, S = Shanghai, and C = Chen)
Trigger Point Region Myofascial Indication Classical Acupoint Acupoint Indication(s)
abdominal obliques (3 regions) “causes diarrhea” SP-13 constipation (D)
enteritis (C)
abdominal obliques (4 regions) “causes diarrhea” SP-14 diarrhea and dysentery (D)
enteritis (C)
abdominal obliques (4 regions) “causes diarrhea” ST-27 abdominal distension (D)
constipation, enteritis (C)
abdominal obliques (2 regions) “causes diarrhea” ST-28 retention of feces (D)
lower abdomen distension (C)
abdominal obliques (2 regions) “causes diarrhea” ST-29 colic (S)

D t Z t s c h r f A k u p. 5 1 , 4 / 2 0 0 8     9     D Z A
 Akupunktur

DZ A
Deutsche Zeitschrift für
Originalia | original articles

pain correspondences were actually “positive” (comparab- classical acupoints is that no evidence of their similarities
le pain indications). These additional clinically correspon- in treating non-pain conditions was presented in that data.
ding point pairs include an iliocostalis mTrP and BL-47, a Beyond the issue that the examination of non-pain uses
hamstring mTrP and BL-37, longissimus mTrPs and BL-18 of trigger points and acupoints was not the purpose of
and BL-19, a subscapularis mTrP and HT-1, a gastrocne- Melzack et al’s study [10], Birch’s report [11] simply failed
mius mTrP and KI-10, a toe extensors mTrP and ST-37, to report the somatovisceral correspondence data that was
a tibialis anterior mTrP and ST-36, a scalene mTrP and present in their data, as outlined above. Note that there
LI-17, first dorsal interosseus and adductor pollicis mTrPs was a 100 % clinical correspondence of the somatovisceral
and LI-4, a pectoralis major mTrP and GB-22, and ad- indications of correlated trigger points and classical acu-
ductor longus mTrPs and LR-10 and LR-11. The degree of
mTrP- classical acupoint clinical pain correspondences in
Melzack et al’s data 10 then increase potentially to 98 % Table 6 Trigger & Acupuncture Points In Other Muscu-
(49/50). The present study serves to confirm those findings loskeletal Disorders
by demonstrating that at least 94% (and probably 97%) of
Trigger Musculoskele- Classical Acupuncture
classical acupoints have clinical pain indications [2–4] that
Point Region tal Indication Acupoint Indication
are comparable to those described for their anatomically
corresponding common trigger point regions [5, 6]. levator scapula, “torticollis” SI-15 shoulder pain,
Though the purpose of Melzack et al’s study [10] was to upper stiff neck
examine the anatomic and clinical similarities of trigger levator scapula, “torticollis” SI-14 neck rigidity,
points and acupuncture points in the treatment of pain lower stiffness
disorders, its data also provided evidence of somatovis-
infraspinatus, “shoulder joint SI-11 shoulder pain
ceral indication correspondences of the correlated trigger
superior region, pain” and heaviness
points and acupuncture points. Melzack et al’s data [10] lateral
documents 9 mTrP-acupoint somatovisceral correspon-
dences (all positive). These included a trapezius mTrP that infraspinatus, “shoulder joint SI-11 shoulder pain
treats cardiac pain syndromes and BL-16 that is used for superior regi- pain“ and heaviness
on, medial
heart pain and pericarditis [2, 3], a pectoralis major mTrP
that treats angina pectoris and KI- 23 that is used for chest extensor “stiff fingers” LI-10 pain and immo-
painful obstruction [2, 3], and a splenius capitis mTrP that digitorum bility of arm
treats headache and TE-16 that is indicated for heada- (3rd finger)
che [2, 3]. Birch’s 2003 re-analysis [11] of Melzack et al’s
data10 concluded that one (clinical) part of the reasons extensor “stiff fingers” TE-9 pain of forearm,
why he believed trigger points should not be compared to digitorum
(4th finger) paralysis of
upper limb

Table 5 “No Correlation” Between Somatovisceral Indi- supinator “tennis el- LU-5 elbow pain and
cations of Anatomically Correlated Trigger and bow” restriction
Acupuncture Points rectus femoris, “buckling hip ST-31 atrophy or blo-
Trigger Point Somatovisceral Correlated Acupuncture superior syndrome” ckage of muscles
Muscle Region Indication Acupoint Indication of thigh/buttock

sternocleido- postural dizzi- LI-17 loss of voice,

mastoid ness and less painful throat vastus “buckling knee SP-11 inguinal and ex-
clavicular head, often vertigo obstruction, medialis, syndrome” ternal genitalia
lower portion difficulty mid-portion problems
breathing
vastus “buckling knee SP-10 pain inner
sternocleido- postural dizzi- SI-16 deafness, medialis, syndrome” thigh, urinary
mastoid cla- ness and less tinnitus, lower portion & menstrual
vicular head, often vertigo ear pain problems
mid-portion
vastus inter- “buckling hip ST-31 contraction of
pectoralis ma- “cardiac KI-22 chest pain/ medius, supe- syndrome” thigh muscles,
jor, parasternal, arrhythmia” fullness, rior portion hemiplegia
lower intercostal
neuralgia vastus latera- “locked patella ST-34 knee pain, dif-
lis, distal por- syndrome” ficulty flexing/
adductor intrapelvic LR-10 difficult tion, anterior extending knee
magnus, upper pain (vagina, urination, pain
portion rectum, or of the genitals, vastus latera- “locked patella GB-33 inability to flex/
bladder pain) cold in the lis, distal por- syndrome” extend knee
uterus tion, posterior

D Z A     1 0     D t Z t s c h r f A k u p. 5 1 , 4 / 2 0 0 8

P. T . D o r s h e r , J . F l e c k e n s t e i n Trigger Points and Classical Acupuncture Points
points in that data [10]! Birch’s 2003 report [11] attemp-
ted to generalize his demonstrably incorrect conclusion
about the lack of reported somatovisceral effects of trigger
points in Melzack et al’s data [10] to all trigger points, even
though the Trigger Point Manual [5, 6] (that was available
to Birch for over a decade before his report) is demonstra-
ted in the present study to document somatovisceral effects
for nearly 25 % of the 255 trigger point regions reported.
Moreover, the somatovisceral effects described for those
common mTrPs [5, 6] are similar to those described for
their anatomically corresponding classical acupoints [2–4]
in over 93 % of comparisons!
This near-complete clinical correspondence of common
mTrPs and classical acupuncture points in the treatment
of pain disorders (at least 94 %) as well as somatovisceral
disorders (at least 93 %) documented in the present study
provides clinical evidence that complements the evidence of
their anatomic correspondences (at least 93.3 %) presented
in the first part of this study [9] to suggest that trigger points
and classical acupoints likely are describing the same phy-
siologic phenomena. Even if skeptics were to argue that the
93.3 % anatomic correspondence found between common
mTrP regions and classical acupuncture points found in this
study could occur by chance (however unlikely), it would
be even more improbable that these anatomically correlated
point pairs would, by chance, also demonstrate nearly 97 %
correlation in their pain indications and a 94 % correlation
in their somatovisceral effects.
Summary
• 93 % (221/238) of anatomically corresponding
mTrPs have pain indications described by the Trig-
ger Point Manual.
• 94 % (208/221) of anatomically corresponding
classical acupoints have comparable regional pain
indications described.
• Another 6 classical acupoints (3 %) have indica-
tions for painful conditions in the distributions of
their correlated mTrPs’ described referred-pain.
• 60 (24 %) of common mTrPs described by the Trig-
ger Point Manual have somatovisceral effects
• At least 93 % (56/60) of their anatomically corre-
sponding classical acupoints have somatovisceral
indications described that are definitely or proba-
bly comparable.
Originalia | original articles
The third (final) part of this study will provide yet an-
other line of evidence of the similarities of the myofascial
pain and acupuncture traditions by demonstrating the
strong correspondences of the distributions of the myo-
fascial referred-pain patterns and acupuncture meridians
of anatomically corresponding common mTrP-classical
acupoint pairs.
Conclusions
The Trigger Point Manual [5, 6] and authoritative acu-
puncture references [2–4] document that there are marked
clinical correspondences of both the pain indications (up
to 97 %) and somatovisceral indications (> 93 %) of ana-
tomically corresponding common trigger point-classical
acupuncture point pairs (classical acupoints that are pro-
ximate to and enter the muscle region of their correlated
common mTrPs). This provides a second, clinical line of
evidence that trigger points and acupuncture points likely
are describing the same physiologic phenomena.
References
1. Helms JM. Acupuncture energetics: a clinical approach for physicians. Ber-
keley: Medical Acupuncture Publishers; 1995
2. Deadman P, Al-Khafaji M, Baker K. A manual of acupuncture. Hove, East
Sussex (UK): Journal of Chinese Medicine Publications; 1998
3. O’Connor J, Bensky D. Acupuncture: a comprehensive text. Chicago:
Eastland Press; 1981
4. Chen E. Cross-sectional anatomy of acupoints. Edinburgh: Churchill
Livingstone; 1995
5. Travell JG, Simons DG. Myofascial pain and dysfunction: the trigger point
manual. Vol 1. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins; 1983
6. Travell JG, Simons DG. Myofascial pain and dysfunction: the trigger point
manual. Vol 2. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins; 1992
7. Manchikanti, L. Medicare in interventional pain management: a critical
analysis. Pain Physician. 2006;9(3):171–197
8. Peng PW, Castano ED. Survey of chronic pain practice by anesthesiologists
in Canada. Canadian J Anesth. 2005;52(4):383–389
9. Dorsher PT, Fleckenstein J. Trigger points and classical acupuncture
points: part 1: qualitative and quantitative anatomic correspondences.
Dt Ztschr f Akup. 2008;51,3:15–24
10. Melzack R, Stillwell DM, Fox EJ. Trigger points and acupuncture points for
pain: correlations and implications. Pain. 1977;3:3–2
11. Birch S. Trigger point: acupuncture point correlations revisited. J Altern
Complement Med. 2003;9:91-103
12. Wiseman N, Ellis A. Fundamentals of chinese medicine. Brookline, Para-
digm Publishers, 1996
D t Z t s c h r f A k u p. 5 1 , 4 / 2 0 0 8     1 1     D Z A