Analytical Approach to the Literature of Cupping Therapy
Koran et al. · J Korean Soc Phys Med · 2021
Evidence Level
MODERATEOBJECTIVE
To analyze the global literature on cupping therapy, evaluating prevalence, therapeutic efficacy, and adverse effects
WHO
381 scientific studies published from 1950-2019, including 127 randomized clinical trials
DURATION
Retrospective analysis of 70 years of scientific literature
POINTS
Traditional acupuncture points and specific areas depending on pain location
🔬 Study Design
Randomized Controlled Trials
n=127
Dry and wet cupping
Non-randomized Studies
n=135
Various cupping therapy protocols
Meta-analyses and Reviews
n=33
Evidence analysis
📊 Results in numbers
Efficacy for pain (22 RCTs)
Efficacy in musculoskeletal disorders
Efficacy in neurological disorders
Efficacy in skin disorders
Percentage highlights
📊 Outcome Comparison
Types of studies on cupping therapy
This large study analyzed all research on cupping therapy over the past 70 years and found solid evidence that the technique is effective for pain, muscle problems, and several other conditions. Cupping therapy was shown to be safe when performed properly by qualified professionals.
Article summary
Plain-language narrative summary
This comprehensive meta-analysis, published in the Journal of Korean Society of Physical Medicine in 2021, represents a milestone in the evaluation of global scientific evidence on cupping therapy. The study, conducted by Koran and Irban, systematically analyzed 381 scientific studies published between 1950 and 2019, representing seven decades of research on this ancient therapeutic modality. The methodology involved a systematic search of the PubMed database using the term "cupping therapy," including studies that combined cupping with other complementary therapies such as acupuncture, moxibustion, and hirudotherapy. The results reveal a diverse distribution of study types: 127 randomized clinical trials (33%), 135 non-randomized studies (35%), 30 reviews (8%), 64 case reports (17%), 15 questionnaire studies (4%), and 3 meta-analyses (1%).
The temporal analysis shows significant growth in the number of publications, especially randomized clinical trials, in the past 10 years, with a notable geographic shift from Far Eastern countries toward Europe and the Americas. The most robust findings demonstrate consistent efficacy of cupping therapy in painful conditions, with all 22 randomized clinical trials on pain (including herpes zoster pain, fibromyalgia, low back pain, neck pain, headache, and acute injuries) showing positive results. The technique also demonstrated efficacy in 34 studies on musculoskeletal disorders (osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, gout, carpal tunnel syndrome), 16 studies on dermatologic conditions (dermatitis, herpes simplex, chronic urticaria, acne vulgaris, acute eczema), and 15 studies on neurological disorders (facial palsy, peroneal nerve palsy, cerebral palsy, brachial paresthesia, postherpetic neuralgia, migraine). The proposed mechanisms of action include local effects, the gate control theory, effects on the neural, hematological, and immune systems, cutaneo-visceral reflex mechanisms, and the placebo effect.
Wet cupping (with bleeding) was shown to be more effective than dry cupping in most studies, especially for pain and inflammatory conditions. The authors identified that the application generally follows traditional acupuncture points or specific areas related to the symptom location. In terms of safety, the analysis of 44 case reports on adverse events revealed that most complications (burns, blisters, keloids, hyperpigmentation, infections, abscesses) occurred after procedures performed by unqualified providers. Limitations include methodological heterogeneity between studies, lack of adequate placebo control in many trials (due to the visible nature of the intervention), and variability in treatment protocols.
The study concludes that there is growing and promising evidence for cupping therapy, especially in painful and musculoskeletal conditions, but emphasizes the need for more high-quality trials and standardization of protocols. The research suggests that cupping therapy is gaining international scientific recognition and may become more widely accepted in Western medicine with the continued accumulation of quality evidence.
Strengths
- 1Comprehensive analysis of 70 years of scientific literature
- 2Large number of included studies (381 studies)
- 3Detailed temporal and geographic analysis of publications
- 4Inclusion of multiple study types and clinical conditions
Limitations
- 1Methodological heterogeneity among the analyzed studies
- 2Difficulty of adequate placebo control in cupping therapy
- 3Variability in treatment protocols across studies
- 4Exclusion of local databases from the analysis
Expert Commentary
Dr. Marcus Yu Bin Pai
MD, PhD · Pain Medicine · Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · Medical Acupuncture
▸ Clinical Relevance
Cupping therapy occupies a growing space in the integrative therapeutic armamentarium of pain and rehabilitation services, and this seven-decade literature analysis offers the clinician a useful panoramic view for decision-making. The consistency of positive results across the 22 RCTs on pain — covering low back pain, neck pain, fibromyalgia, headache, and postherpetic neuralgia — supports its consideration in patients refractory to isolated conventional approaches or in whom one seeks to reduce the pharmacological burden. In the musculoskeletal context, where conditions such as osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and carpal tunnel syndrome often require prolonged multimodal management, the technique fits in as a viable adjuvant component. The geographic shift in publications from the Far East toward Europe and the Americas reflects progressive scientific legitimization that tends to facilitate incorporation into Western rehabilitation protocols.
▸ Notable Findings
The most striking finding in this analysis is the 100% positive result rate among the 22 RCTs dedicated to pain, across a spectrum that ranges from acute to chronic to neuropathic conditions. Even acknowledging that positive trials are more likely to be published, the breadth of conditions covered — herpes zoster, fibromyalgia, headache, and low back pain — lends robustness to the observed pattern. Equally relevant is the superiority of wet cupping over dry cupping in pain and inflammatory conditions, a finding that guides technical choice in practice. The proposed mechanisms — gate control theory, neurohumoral and immune effects, as well as cutaneo-visceral reflex mechanisms — engage directly with modern pain neurophysiology models. The safety analysis is also informative: the serious adverse events concentrated in procedures performed by unqualified providers, reinforcing that operator competence is a determinant variable.
▸ From My Experience
In my practice in the pain and rehabilitation clinic, I have incorporated cupping therapy predominantly as an adjuvant technique to dry needling and active physical therapy, especially in chronic low back pain with an evident myofascial component and in neck pain with mobility restriction. I usually observe a subjective response starting at the second or third session, with more consistent functional improvement around the sixth to eighth session — a pattern that converges with what this review indirectly suggests through the duration of the studied protocols. For the patient profile with fibromyalgia or refractory postherpetic neuralgia, I combine dry cupping with active trigger points identified clinically, with satisfactory results in modulation of regional allodynia. I avoid the wet technique in anticoagulated or immunosuppressed patients. The safety data in this review validate what I have always taught residents: the complication is not in the technique but in the hand that performs it.
Full original article
Read the full scientific study
J Korean Soc Phys Med · 2021
DOI: 10.13066/kspm.2021.16.3.1
Access original articleScientific Review

Marcus Yu Bin Pai, MD, PhD
CRM-SP: 158074 | RQE: 65523 · 65524 · 655241
PhD in Health Sciences, University of São Paulo. Board-certified in Pain Medicine, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, and Medical Acupuncture. Scientific review and curation of every entry in this library.
Learn more about the author →Medical disclaimer: This content is for educational purposes only and does not replace consultation, diagnosis, or treatment by a qualified professional. Some information may be assisted by artificial intelligence and is subject to inaccuracies. Always consult a physician.
Content reviewed by the medical team at CEIMEC — Integrated Centre for Chinese Medicine Studies, a reference in Medical Acupuncture for over 30 years.
Related articles
Based on this article’s categories