Treatment of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome with tamsulosin: a randomized double blind trial

Efficacy of acupuncture on drinkers with chronic prostatitis / chronic pelvic pain syndrome: secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture in drinkers with chronic prostatitis / chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial across multiple centers, involving 224 drinkers. Patients received either acupuncture or sham acupuncture treatment. The primary outcome was the proportion of responders, defined as participants who had a reduction of 6 points or more from baseline in the National Institute of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) total score at weeks 8 and 32. Secondary outcomes measures included the Global Response Assessment (GRA), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and International Index of Erectile Function 5 (IIEF-5).

RESULTS

One hundred and twelve drinkers were included in each group (n = 224 in total). The proportion of responders in terms of NIH-CPSI was 58.9% versus 40.3% in the acupuncture group (AG) and sham acupuncture group (SAG), respectively, with a statistically significant difference of 18.6% (p = 0.002) at week 8. Higher proportions of responders with respect to NIH-CPSI (p < 0.001 at week 32) and GRA (p < 0.001 at week 8 and p = 0.01 at week 32) were observed in the AG compared with the SAG. No between-group differences were found in the changes in IPSS at any assessment time point. Changes in IIEF-5 score were significantly higher in the AG than in the SAG at weeks 20 and 32, while the difference was not statistically significant at week 8.

CONCLUSION

Acupuncture appeared to alleviate the symptoms of pain among drinkers with CP/CPPS and improve their quality of life, but had no demonstrable effect on urinary tract symptoms or erectile function among these patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03213938 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Therapeutic Approaches for Urologic Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome; Management: Research Advances, Experimental Targets, and Future Directions

Urologic chronic pelvic pain syndrome (UCPPS) is a painful chronic condition with persistent pain originating from the pelvis that often leads to detrimental lifestyle changes in the affected patients. The syndrome develops in both sexes, with an estimated prevalence of 5.7% to 26.6% worldwide. This narrative review summarizes currently recommended therapies for UCPPS, followed by the latest animal model findings and clinical research advances in the field. The diagnosis of UCPPS by clinicians has room for improvement despite the changes in the past decade aiming to decrease the time to treatment. Therapeutic approaches targeting growth factors (i.e., nerve growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor), amniotic bladder therapy, and stem cell treatments gain more attention as experimental treatment options for UCPPS. The development of novel diagnostic tests based on the latest advances in urinary biomarkers would be beneficial to assist with the clinical diagnosis of UCPPS. Future research directions should address the role of chronic psychologic stress and the mechanisms of pain refractory to conventional management strategies in UCPPS etiology. Testing the applicability of cognitive behavioral therapy in this cohort of UCPPS patients might be promising to increase their quality of life. The search for novel lead compounds and innovative drug delivery systems requires clinically relevant translational animal models. The role of autoimmune responses triggered by environmental factors is another promising research direction to clarify the impact of the immune system in UCPPS pathophysiology. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This minireview provides an up-to-date summary of the therapeutic approaches for UCPPS with a focus on recent advancements in the clinical diagnosis and treatments of the disease, pathophysiological mechanisms of UCPPS, signaling pathways, and molecular targets involved in pelvic nociception.

Chronic Primary Pelvic Pain Syndrome in Men

BACKGROUND

Chronic primary pelvic pain syndrome in men (CPPPSm) can be associated with urogenital pain, urinary symptoms, sexual dysfunction, and emotional disturbance. Its clinical heterogeneity and incompletely understood pathogenesis make it more difficult to treat. This article is intended to familiarize the reader with basic aspects of the manifestations, pathophysiology, diagnostic evaluation, differential diagnosis, and treatment of this condition.

METHODS

This article is based on relevant publications retrieved by a selective search of the literature, including the current guidelines of the European Association of Urology. The features of this disease pertaining to urology, psychosomatic medicine, and pain medicine are illuminated from an interdisciplinary perspective.

RESULTS

Chronic pelvic pain appears to arise through a complex interaction of inflammatory, infectious, neurological, musculoskeletal, and psychosomatic factors. A comprehensive diagnostic work-up should be carried out to evaluate and exclude the numerous differential diagnoses. Treatment strategies are based on the clinical phenotype. Randomized controlled trials have shown that significant relief can be achieved with a variety of drugs and non-pharmacological treatments, selected according to the manifestations of the condition in the individual case. Attention must be paid to treatment-specific adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

The management of patients with CPPPSm should consist of a comprehensive differential diagnostic evaluation and an individually oriented treatment strategy.

Is there any effect of alpha-adrenergic blocker usage in preventing febrile urinary tract infections after prostate biopsy?

Purpose: To investigate whether the use of long term alpha-adrenergic blockers before biopsy has an effect on preventing febrile urinary tract infections (FUI) secondary to biopsy in patients undergoing prostate biopsy due to elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA). Material and Methods: The data of 2558 patients who underwent transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS+BX) due to elevated PSA in our clinic between January 2008 and July 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups as those who used alpha-blockers for a minimum of three months or longer before biopsy (Group 1) and those who did not use alpha-blockers before applying to the outpatient clinic (Group 2). Demographic data of the groups and post-biopsy FUI development rates were compared. Results: It was observed that 1340 (52.4%) of the patients were using alpha-blockers (Group 1) and 1218 (47.6%) did not (Group 2). The median age of the patients in the pre-biopsy groups was similar [Group 1=68(IQR=9) years and Group 2=68(IQR=9) years, p=0.887]. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of median prostate volume [Group1=57(31) ml and Group2=58(34)ml, p=0.199]. The median PSA value was found to be significantly higher in Group 1 than in Group 2 [ 10.50(5.40)ng/dl vs 10.35(6.80)ng/dl, p=0.026]. Postvoid residual urine volume (PVR) was found to be significantly higher in Group 2 [Group 1=40(30) ml and Group2=60(90) ml, p

Evolving Role of Silodosin for the Treatment of Urological Disorders – A Narrative Review

Use of α-androgenic receptor blockers remains a mainstay therapeutic approach for the treatment of urological diseases. Silodosin is recommended over other α-blockers for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), due to its high α_1A uroselectivity. Current research data suggest that silodosin is efficacious in the management of various urological diseases. Thus, we herein review the current evidence of silodosin related to its efficacy and tolerability and appraise the available literature that might ultimately aid in management of various urological conditions at routine clinical practice. Literature reveals that silodosin is beneficial in improving nocturia events related to LUTS/BPH. Silodosin exerts effect on relaxing muscles involved in detrusor obstruction, therefore prolonging the need for patients undergoing invasive surgery. Silodosin treatment, either as a monotherapy or combination, significantly improves International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) including both storage and voiding symptoms in patients with BPH/LUTS. Patients on other treatment therapies such as phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors or other α-blockers are well managed with this drug. Steadily, silodosin has proved beneficial in the treatment of other urological disorders such as chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS), overactive bladder/acute urinary retention (AUR), premature ejaculation (PE), and prostate cancer post brachytherapy-induced progression. In patients with distal ureteral stones, silodosin treatment is beneficial in decreasing stone expulsion time without affecting stone expulsion rate or analgesic need. Moreover, there were significant improvements in intravaginal ejaculation latency time, quality of life scores, and decrease in PE profile among patients with PE. Silodosin has also demonstrated promising results in increasing the likelihood of successful trial without catheter in patients with AUR and those taking antihypertensive drugs. Reports from Phase II studies have shown promising role of silodosin in the treatment of CP/CPPS as well as facilitating ureteral stone passage. From the robust data in this review, further silodosin treatment strategies in the management of different urological conditions need to be focused on.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo effect in clinical trials on chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

It is a common practice to control efficacy of pharmacological treatment with a placebo group. However, placebo itself may affect subjective and even objective results. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the placebo effect on symptoms of CP/CPPS to improve future clinical trials.

METHODS

A search at three databases (Scopus, MEDLINE, and Web of Science) was conducted to identify double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials on the treatment of CP/CPPS published until April 2021. The primary outcome - National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Qmax, PVR, IPSS, and prostate volume.

RESULTS

A total of 3502 studies were identified. Placebo arms of 42 articles (5512 patients, median 31 patients) were included in the systematic review. Systematic review identified positive changes in the primary endpoint, meta-analysis of 10 articles found that NIH-CPSI total score results were significantly influenced by placebo, mean difference -4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.31, -2.09). Mean difference of NIH-CPSI pain domain was -2.31 (95% CI: -3.4, -1.21), urinary domain -1.12 (95% CI: -1.62, -0.62), quality of life domain -1.67 (95% CI: -2.38, -0.96); p < 0.001 for all. In case of the objective indicator - Qmax, there were three articles included in the meta-analysis. Qmax mean change from baseline was 0.68 (95% CI: -0.85, 2.22, p = 0.38). Systematic review showed no significant changes in pain, measured by VAS or other scores, IPSS and PVR.

CONCLUSIONS

Placebo significantly affected the subjective parameters (NIH-CPSI) and limitedly affected various other measurements of pain (visual analog scale, McGill pain questionnaire). There was no long-term effect on IPSS and objective measurements (Qmax, PVR). This study can be used in further clinical trials to develop general rules of CPPS treatment assessment.

Diagnostic and Management Strategies for Patients with Chronic Prostatitis and Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common and often heterogenous condition that can have severe consequences on patient quality of life. In this review, we describe the pathophysiology, diagnostic work-up, and treatment of patients with CP/CPPS incorporating the most recent literature. Studies have demonstrated that CP/CPPS involves a complex pathophysiology, including infectious, immunologic, neurologic, endocrinologic, and psychologic etiologies, with frequent intersections between the different entities. Despite robust research assessing a variety of therapeutics targeting these etiologies, clinical trials have failed to identify an empiric treatment strategy applicable specifically to older adult male patients with CP/CPPS. As such, it can be challenging to manage older male patients with this condition. The advent of clinical phenotyping of patients with CP/CPPS has led to advances in tailored management strategies. Monomodal therapy has been largely unsuccessful because of the unclear and complex etiology of CPPS. As a result, CP/CPPS therapy has transitioned to a multimodal approach, including both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapies. The best studied pharmacologic therapies include antibiotics, alpha-blockers, anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory agents, phytotherapies, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, hormonal agents, neuromodulatory agents, and antidepressants. The best studied non-pharmacological therapies include pelvic floor physical therapy, myofascial trigger point release, acupuncture and electroacupuncture, psychological support and biofeedback, and electrocorporeal shockwave therapy and local thermotherapy.

Effects of inflammatory prostatitis on the development and progression of benign prostatic hyperplasia: A literature review

Benign prostatic hyperplasia is a major disease that affects the quality of life of middle-aged and older men. Although >70% of men aged >70 years have pathological benign prostatic hyperplasia, its pathogenesis and progression remain unclear. In this article, we reviewed the scientific literature on this condition and examined the development of lower urinary tract symptoms. Clinically, the weight of the prostate is not always proportional to the severity of the symptoms, and many factors can influence the progression of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Other than androgens, chronic inflammation can play an essential role in its development and the induction of symptoms, especially in symptomatic hyperplasia, because inflammatory cell infiltration is frequently observed in the prostate. Inflammation-induced changes in the prostate environment lead to changes in gene expression and subsequent chronicity of inflammation. It has been suggested that chronic asymptomatic prostatitis might be associated with changes in prostate structure and subsequent symptoms. In animal studies, the administration of anti-inflammatory drugs in rats with chronic prostatitis prevented the infiltration of inflammatory cells and increased the gland-to-stroma ratio. It is hoped that future research on the molecular biology of asymptomatic prostatitis might help to develop new therapeutic strategies for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with symptomatic prostatitis. Our conclusions provide a comprehensive insight into the prevalence and development of benign prostate hyperplasia and the treatment methods that can be used to treat it.

Efficacy and Safety of Ningmitai Capsule in Patients With Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To validate the efficacy and safety of Ningmitai capsule (NMT) in the patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 120 men with CP/CPPS to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NMT. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to NMT or placebo treatment for 4 weeks at 3 centres. The patients were evaluated by the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) at baseline, the end of 2 and 4 weeks of treatment. The primary endpoints were the changes of the NIH-CPSI pain scores from baseline to the end of 2 and 4 weeks of the treatment. The secondary endpoints include the changes of the NIH-CPSI total scores, urinary symptoms scores and the quality of life (QoL) as well as the responder rate.

RESULTS

After 2 and 4 weeks of treatment, the mean decreases of the NIH-CPSI pain scores, total scores and QoL in the NMT group were all significantly superior to those in the placebo group. The responder rate was significantly higher in the NMT group than that in the placebo group at both 2 and 4 weeks. No adverse events were reported during the treatment.

CONCLUSION

NMT could significantly improve the pain symptoms and QoL in the patients with CP/CPPS as early as in 2 weeks, and the efficacy enhanced at the end of the 4-week treatment. The safety of NMT was confirmed in this trial.

Efficacy of radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A protocol for systematic review

BACKGROUND

Prostatitis is a common urogenital system disease in men which affects 5% to 9% of adult men worldwide and accounts for approximately 8% of visits to urologists. In the past years, its pathogenesis is complicated and the classification of it is not clear, so the effect of treatment measures is not significant. Recently, the treatment of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) includes nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, phytotherapy, hormonal therapy, alpha-blockers, anti-anxiolytic, and acupuncture, which provide more choice for the urologist. But there still are some limitations. scholars. Many studies suggest radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy may be the better option in the treatment of CP/CPPS. However, the efficacy and safety of it still lack solid evidence.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The electronic databases of MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.org, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Wan fang Database, China Biology Medicine Database, VIP Science Technology Periodical Database, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry will be retrieved. All the randomized controlled trials of radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT) for patients with CP/CPPS will be included. We will evaluate the outcomes including National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index, visual analog scale, international prostate symptom score, international index of erectile function-5, and conduct this study strictly according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

RESULTS

The current study is a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis without results, and data analysis will be carried out after the protocol. We will share our findings on October 31st of 2021.

CONCLUSION

rESWT as a noninvasive treatment with no pain, which will be accepted more easily. Although some studies have suggested that rESWT can relieve the symptoms of patients, the efficacy and safety of it still lack solid evidence. To address this limitation scientifically and systematically, this study will inspect the efficacy and safety of the rESWT treatment in patients with CP/CPPS by integrating various studies.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Formal ethical approval is not required in this protocol. We will collect and analyze data based on published studies, and since there are no patients involved in this study, individual privacy will not be under concerns. The results of this review will be disseminated to peer-reviewed journals or submit to related conferences.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER

INPLASY202090076.

The Anti-Inflammatory and Antioxidative Effects of Ningmitai Capsule in the Experimental Autoimmune Prostatitis Rat Model

Objective

Ningmitai (NMT) capsule has been widely prescribed for the treatment of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS), but the mechanism remains unclear. This study aims to evaluate the therapeutic effects of the NMT capsule in the experimental autoimmune prostatitis (EAP) rat models and explore its possible mechanisms.

Methods

A total of fifty male Sprague Dawley rats were used in this study. Prostate extract was obtained for the induction of EAP rat models. The EAP rats were randomly divided into the model group, NMT low-dose group (0.45 g/kg/d), NMT medium-dose group (0.90 g/kg/d), and NMT high-dose group (1.80 g/kg/d), with six rats per group. Three NMT treatment groups were administered with the NMT capsule by gavage for 30 days. HE staining was used for histopathological analyses of prostate tissues. Western blotting was used to measure the expression of proinflammatory factors IL-1β and TNF-α. The MDA level was detected to reflect the level of oxidative stress. The bilateral dorsal root ganglia of T3/L1 to S4 were dissected to measure the substance P expression.

Results

EAP rat models were successfully constructed, in which extensive infiltration of inflammatory cells was found. Treatment of NMT capsule for 30 days and the infiltration of inflammatory cells were significantly mitigated (P < 0.05), especially in the NMT medium-dose group and NMT high-dose group. Moreover, the expression of IL-1β and the level of MDA were significantly decreased (P < 0.05). In addition, NMT treatment could significantly alleviate substance P expression in dorsal root ganglia.

Conclusion

Our findings demonstrate that the NMT capsule can alleviate inflammatory response and oxidative stress and reduce the production of substance P in EAP rats. This provides a theoretical basis for the clinical application of NMT capsule for CP/CPPS treatment.

Pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common disorder in which the two main clinical features are pelvic pain and lower urinary tract symptoms. There are currently many approaches for its management, using both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. The National Institute of Health - Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score is a validated measure commonly used to measure CP/CPPS symptoms. We considered a 25% decrease of NIH-CPSI baseline score or a six-point reduction as MCID.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings, with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was July 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available pharmacological interventions compared to placebo or in head-to-head comparisons.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the risks of bias of included studies. We assessed the quality of the evidence (QoE) using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 99 unique studies in 9119 men with CP/CPPS, with assessments of 16 types of pharmacological interventions. Unless stated otherwise, our comparisons were based on short-term follow-up (less than 12 months). Most studies did not specify their funding sources; 21 studies reported funding from pharmaceutical companies.1. Alpha blockers: (24 studies, 2061 participants). We are uncertain about the effects of these drugs on prostatitis symptoms when compared to placebo at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) in total NIH-CPSI score -5.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.41 to -2.61; 18 studies, 1524 participants, very low QoE) and at long-term follow-up (MD -5.60, 95% CI -10.89 to -0.32; 4 studies, 235 participants, very low QoE). Alpha blockers may be associated with an increased incidence of adverse events, such as dizziness and postural hypotension (risk ratio (RR) 1.60, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.34; 19 studies, 1588 participants; low QoE). Alpha blockers probably result in little to no difference in sexual dysfunction, quality of life and anxiety and depression (moderate to low QoE).2. 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARI): (2 studies, 177 participants). Finasteride probably reduces prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI score MD -4.60, 95% CI -5.43 to -3.77; 1 study, 64 participants; moderate QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence of adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.3. Antibiotics: (6 studies, 693 participants). Antibiotics (quinolones) may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.43, 95% CI -4.72 to -0.15; 5 studies, 372 participants; low QoE) and are probably not associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (moderate QoE). Antibiotics probably result in little to no difference in sexual dysfunction and quality of life (moderate QoE). There was no information on anxiety or depression.4. Anti-inflammatories: (7 studies, 585 participants). Anti-inflammatories may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI scores MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.74 to -1.26; 7 studies, 585 participants; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.5. Phytotherapy: (7 studies, 551 participants). Phytotherapy may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI scores MD -5.02, 95% CI -6.81 to -3.23; 5 studies, 320 participants; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). Phytotherapy may not improve sexual dysfunction (low QoE). There was no information on quality of life or anxiety and depression.6. Botulinum toxin A (BTA): Intraprostatic BTA injection (1 study, 60 participants) may cause a large reduction in prostatitis symptom (NIH-CPSI scores MD -25.80, 95% CI -30.15 to -21.45), whereas pelvic floor muscle BTA injection (1 study, 29 participants) may not reduce prostatitis symptoms (low QoE). Both comparisons used a placebo injection. These interventions may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.7. Allopurinol: (2 studies, 110 participants). Allopurinol may result in little to no difference in prostatitis symptoms and adverse events when compared to placebo (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.8. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM): (7 studies, 835 participants); TCM may reduce prostatitis symptoms (NIH-CPSI score, MD -3.13, 95% CI -4.99 to -1.28; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). TCM probably does not improve sexual dysfunction (moderate QoE) and may not improve symptoms of anxiety and depression (low QoE). There was no information on quality of life.The most frequent reasons for downgrading the QoE were study limitations, inconsistency and imprecision. We found few trials with active comparators.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low- to very low-quality evidence that alpha blockers, antibiotics, 5-ARI, anti-inflammatories, phytotherapy, intraprostatic BTA injection, and traditional Chinese medicine may cause a reduction in prostatitis symptoms without an increased incidence of adverse events in the short term, except for alpha blockers which may be associated with an increase in mild adverse events. We found few trials with active comparators and little evidence of the effects of these drugs on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression. Future clinical trials should include a full report of their methods, including adequate masking, consistent assessment of all patient-important outcomes, including potential treatment-related adverse events, and appropriate sample sizes.

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy decreases COX-2 by inhibiting TLR4-NFκB pathway in a prostatitis rat model

BACKGROUND

This study aims to evaluate the effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) on chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) and to explore the mechanism.

METHODS

RWPE-2 cells were randomly divided into three groups: (a) RWPE-2 group (normal control), (b) LPS groups (lipopolysaccharide inducing inflammation) and (c) ESWT groups (LPS induced RWPE-2 treated by ESWT). After ESWT was administered, cells and supernatant were collected for enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and Western blot analysis. In vivo, Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 30) were randomly divided into three groups: (a) normal control group, (b) prostatitis groups, and (c) ESWT groups. Prostatitis rats were induced by 17 β-estradiol and dihydrotestosterone for 4 weeks. After ESWT, prostates of each group were collected for immunohistochemistry, Western blot analysis, and ELISA.

RESULTS

ESWT improved prostatitis by attenuating inflammation (P < .01). ESWT downregulated the expression of cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) through inhibiting TLR4-NFκB pathway compared with the LPS group in vitro or prostatitis group in vivo (P < .05). TRAF2 mediates ERK1/2-COX2 pathway. ESWT promotes prostate tissue recovery by stimulating vascular endothelial growth factor expression (P < .01). ESWT could suppress apoptosis in the prostate.

CONCLUSIONS

ESWT improved CP/CPPS and reduced inflammation by degrading COX-2 in microenvironment through TLR4-NFκB-inhibiting pathway. TRAF2 regulator in ERK1/2-COX-2 inhibition significantly reduced inflammation, thus suggesting ESWT may be a potential and promising treatment for CP/CPPS.

Interventions to chronic prostatitis/Chronic pelvic pain syndrome treatment. Where are we standing and what's next?

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a frustrating syndrome. The pathogenesis and state of the art treatment of CP/CPPS are not known. A wide variety of therapies including anti-inflammatories, antibiotics, alpha-blockers, neuropathic pain modulators, and 5α-reductase inhibitors are in practice. These treatment strategies focus on alleviating symptoms in specific domains without treating root-cause and therapeutic outcome is far from satisfactory. We review the literature on current pharmacological treatments for CP/CPPS in detail and suggest future perspectives to modify the treatment strategies. We suggest that introducing novel treatment strategies such as gene editing, and T_regs expressing chimeric receptors may improve the treatment outcomes by inducing immune tolerance and controlling expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines.

Efficacy and safety of moxibustion in patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common urogenital disease. Moxibustion is a complementary treatment option for CP/CPPS. This systematic review will assess the efficacy and safety of moxibustion as a sole or add-on therapy for CP/CPPS.

METHODS

We will retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of moxibustion for CP/CPPS from the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, VIP, Chinese Biomedical Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Wanfang Data, Chinese Medicine Database System, Google Scholar, Clinicaltrials.gov, and China Clinical Trial Registry from their inception to March 9, 2019, without language restrictions. RCTs comparing moxibustion with active drugs or moxibustion + drugs with these same drugs alone will be included. Primary outcomes will be the change in the total score of the National Institutes of Health's Chronic Prostatic Inflammatory States Index (NIH-CPSI) after moxibustion treatment. Secondary outcomes will include the scores of the individual NIH-CPSI domains, response to treatment of CP/CPPS, leucocyte and phosphatidylcholine corpuscle count in prostatic fluid, incidence of adverse events (AEs), and incidence of moxibustion-related AEs. The Cochrane risk of bias tool will be used for evaluating the risk of bias of individual trials. Heterogeneity will be detected by the Cochran Q test and I-square test. A random-effects model will be used to pool data in the meta-analysis. Risk ratio and weighted or standardized mean difference will be used as the effect measures. Three sets of subgroup analyses will be performed to explore the sources of heterogeneity. Where appropriate, we will assess the likelihood of publication bias based on funnel plots and quantitative tests.

RESULTS

This study will produce the systematic review evidence regarding moxibustion for treating CP/CPPS based on current RCTs.

CONCLUSION

This study will provide a clear basis for understanding the efficacy and adverse reactions of moxibustion treatment for CP/CPPS.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019121338.

Recent advances in managing chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome is a common disorder seen in men under the age of 50 and has a considerable negative impact on quality of life; it is a complex and difficult condition to treat, owing to its wide symptomatology. In order to effectively treat this condition, the UPOINT system was developed: it allows clinical profiling of a patient's symptoms into six broad categories (urinary symptoms, psychological dysfunction, organ-specific symptoms, infectious causes, neurologic dysfunction, and tenderness of the pelvic floor muscles) to allow individualized and multimodal therapy. In this review, we present the most recent advancements in the treatment of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome from the past few years.

Comprehensive overview of prostatitis

Prostatitis is a common urinary tract syndrome that many doctors find problematic to treat effectively. It is the third most commonly found urinary tract disease in men after prostate cancer and Benign Prostate Hyperplasia (BPH). Prostatitis may account for 25% of all office visits made to the urological clinics complaining about the genital and urinary systems all over the world. In the present study, we classified prostatitis and comprehensively elaborated the etiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of acute bacterial prostatitis (category I), chronic bacterial prostatitis (category II), chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) (category III), and asymptomatic prostatitis (category IV). In addition, we also tried to get some insights about other types of prostatitis-like fungal, viral and gonococcal prostatitis. The aim of this review is to present the detail current perspective of prostatitis in a single review. To the best of our knowledge currently, there is not a single comprehensive review, which can completely elaborate this important topic in an effective way. Furthermore, this review will provide a solid platform to conduct future studies on different aspects such as risk factors, mechanism of pathogenesis, proper diagnosis, and rational treatment plans for fungal, viral, and gonococcal prostatitis.

Systematic Review of Acupuncture for Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome

Acupuncture is a promising therapy for relieving symptoms in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS), which affects >15% of adult men worldwide. The aim of the study was to assess the effects and safety of the use of acupuncture for CP/CPPS. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI, Wang-Fang Database, JCRM, and CiNii were searched from their inception through 30 November 2015. Grey literature databases and websites were also searched. No language limits were applied. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with CP/CPPS treated by acupuncture were included. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of RCTs using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tools, respectively. Seven trials were included, involving 471 participants. The result of meta-analysis indicated that compared with sham acupuncture (MD: -6.09 [95%CI: -8.12 to -5.68]) and medicine (Levofloxacinand, Ibuprofen, and Tamsulosin) (MD: -4.57 [95%CI: -7.58 to -1.56]), acupuncture was more effective at decreasing the total NIH-CPSI score. Real acupuncture was superior to sham acupuncture in improving symptoms (pain, voiding) and quality of life (Qof) domain subscores. Compared to sham acupuncture and medicine, acupuncture appears to be more effective at improving the global assessment. Two trials found that there is no significant difference between acupuncture and sham acupuncture in decreasing the IPSS score. Acupuncture failed to show more favorable effects in improving both symptoms and the Qof domain compared with medicine. Overall, current evidence supports acupuncture as an effective treatment for CP/CPPS-induced symptoms, particularly in relieving pain. Based on the meta-analysis, acupuncture is superior to sham acupuncture in improving symptoms and Qof. Acupuncture might be similar to medicine (Levofloxacinand, Ibuprofen, and Tamsulosin) in its long-term effects, but evidence was limited due to high ROB among included trials as well as potential heterogeneity. Acupuncture is associated with rare and slightly adverse events. Protocol registration PROSPERO CRD42015027522.

Eviprostat has an identical effect compared to pollen extract (Cernilton) in patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a randomized, prospective study

Background

Previously reported results of a prospective, randomized placebo-controlled study showed that the pollen extract (Cernilton) significantly improved total symptoms, pain, and quality of life in patients with inflammatory prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) without severe side effects. A phytotherapeutic agent, Eviprostat, is reportedly effective in a rat model of nonbacterial prostatitis. The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy and safety of Eviprostat to that of the pollen extract in the management of CP/CPPS.

Methods

The patients with category III CP/CPPS were randomized to receive either oral capsules of Eviprostat (two capsules, q 8 h) or the pollen extract (two capsules, q 8 h) for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint of the study was symptomatic improvement in the NIH Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI). Participants were evaluated using the NIH-CPSI and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at baseline and after 4 and 8 weeks.

Results

In the intention-to-treat analysis, 100 men were randomly allocated to Eviprostat (n = 50) or the pollen extract (n = 50). Response (defined as a decrease in the NIH-CPSI total score by at least 25 %) in the Eviprostat group and the pollen extract group was 88.2 and 78.1 %, respectively. There was no significant difference in the total, pain, urinary, and quality of life (QOL) scores of the NIH-CPSI between the two groups at 8 weeks. This was also the case with the total, voiding, and storage symptoms of the IPSS. There were no severe adverse events observed in any patients in this study.

Conclusion

Both the pollen extract and Eviprostat significantly reduced the symptoms of category III CP/CPPS without any adverse events. Eviprostat may have an identical effect on category III CP/CPPS compared the pollen extract.

Trial registration

The study was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry in Japan (UMIN000019618); registration date: 3 November 2015.

A randomized controlled trial of levofloxacin, terazosin, and combination therapy in patients with category III chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To explore the efficacy of levofloxacin, terazosin, and their combination in patients with category III chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).

METHODS

A total of 115 patients with category III CP/CPPS receiving 6-week therapy were randomly divided into the levofloxacin group (n = 38), terazosin group (n = 38), and combination group (n = 39). The primary endpoint was the response rate (i.e., the change from baseline) in the total and domain scores of the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI). Secondary endpoints were expressed as prostatic secretion-white blood cell (EPS-WBC) and International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5).

RESULTS

After 6 weeks, the response rate of NIH-CPSI scores was 45.1, 22.4, and 50.0 % in the levofloxacin group, terazosin group, and combination group, respectively. Furthermore, no significant difference in NIH-CPSI scores was observed between IIIA and IIIB patients in each arm. Levofloxacin alone or levofloxacin plus terazosin could significantly reduce EPS-WBC counts compared with terazosin alone. Finally, no significant difference was found between the three arms in terms of IIEF-5 scores.

CONCLUSION

A 6-week short-term treatment of levofloxacin or levofloxacin plus terazosin was more effective than terazosin alone in patients with category III CP/CPPS. Furthermore, levofloxacin treatment was not different from levofloxacin plus terazosin treatment in terms of treatment effect.

Contemporary Management of Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome

CONTEXT

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common condition that causes severe symptoms, bother, and quality-of-life impact in the 8.2% of men who are believed to be affected. Research suggests a complex pathophysiology underlying this syndrome that is mirrored by its heterogeneous clinical presentation. Management of patients diagnosed with CP/CPPS has always been a formidable task in clinical practice. Due to its enigmatic etiology, a plethora of clinical trials failed to identify an efficient monotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

A comprehensive review of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the treatment of CP/CPPS and practical best evidence recommendations for management.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Medline and the Cochrane database were screened for RCTs on the treatment of CP/CPPS from 1998 to December 2014, using the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index as an objective outcome measure. Published data in concert with expert opinion were used to formulate a practical best evidence statement for the management of CP/CPPS.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Twenty-eight RCTs identified were eligible for this review and presented. Trials evaluating antibiotics, α-blockers, anti-inflammatory and immune-modulating substances, hormonal agents, phytotherapeutics, neuromodulatory drugs, agents that modify bladder function, and physical treatment options failed to reveal a clear therapeutic benefit. With its multifactorial pathophysiology and its various clinical presentations, the management of CP/CPPS demands a phenotypic-directed approach addressing the individual clinical profile of each patient. Different categorization algorithms have been proposed. First studies applying the UPOINTs classification system provided promising results. Introducing three index patients with CP/CPPS, we present practical best evidence recommendations for management.

CONCLUSIONS

Our current understanding of the pathophysiology underlying CP/CPPS resulting in this highly variable syndrome does not speak in favor of a monotherapy for management. No efficient monotherapeutic option is available. The best evidence-based management of CP/CPPS strongly suggests a multimodal therapeutic approach addressing the individual clinical phenotypic profile.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome presents a variable syndrome. Successful management of this condition is challenging. It appears that a tailored treatment strategy addressing individual patient characteristics is more effective than one single therapy.

Diagnosis and treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a consensus guideline

Objectives

To improve awareness and recognition of chronic bacterial prostatitis (CBP) and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) among non‐specialists and patients. To provide guidance to healthcare professionals treating patients with CBP and CP/CPPS, in both non‐specialist and specialist settings. To promote efficient referral of care between non‐specialists and specialists and the involvement of the multidisciplinary team (MDT).

Patients and Methods

The guideline population were men with CBP or CP/CPPS (persistent or recurrent symptoms and no other urogenital pathology for ≥3 of the previous 6 months). Consensus recommendations for the guidelines were based on a search to identify literature on the diagnosis and management of CBP and CP/CPPS (published between 1999 and February 2014). A Delphi panel process was used where high‐quality, published evidence was lacking.

Results

CBP and CP/CPPS can present with a wide range of clinical manifestations. The four main symptom domains are urogenital pain, lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS – voiding or storage symptoms), psychological issues and sexual dysfunction. Patients should be managed according to their individual symptom pattern. Options for first‐line treatment include antibiotics, α‐adrenergic antagonists (if voiding LUTS are present) and simple analgesics. Repeated use of antibiotics, such as quinolones, should be avoided if there is no obvious symptomatic benefit from infection control or cultures do not support an infectious cause. Early use of treatments targeting neuropathic pain and/or referral to specialist services should be considered for patients who do not respond to initial measures. An MDT approach (urologists, pain specialists, nurse specialists, specialist physiotherapists, general practitioners, cognitive behavioural therapists/psychologists, and sexual health specialists) is recommended. Patients should be fully informed about the possible underlying causes and treatment options, including an explanation of the chronic pain cycle.

Conclusion

Chronic prostatitis can present with a wide variety of signs and symptoms. Identification of individual symptom patterns and a symptom‐based treatment approach are recommended. Further research is required to evaluate management options for CBP and CP/CPPS.

Updates on therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Prostatitis comprises of a group of syndromes that affect almost 50% of men at least once in their lifetime and makeup the majority of visits to the Urology Clinics. After much debate, it has been divided into four distinct categories by National Institutes of Health namely (1) acute bacterial prostatitis; (2) chronic bacterial prostatitis; (3) chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) which is further divided into inflammatory and non-inflammatory CP/CPPS; and (4) asymptomatic inflammatory prostatitis. CP/CPPS has been a cause of great concern for both patients and physicians because of the lack of presence of thorough information about the etiological factors along with the difficult-to-treat nature of the syndrome. For the presented manuscript an extensive search on PubMed was conducted for CP/CPPS aimed to present an updated review on the evaluation and treatment options available for patients with CP/CPPS. Several diagnostic criteria’s have been established to diagnose CP/CPPS, with prostatic/pelvic pain for at least 3 mo being the major classifying symptom along with the presence of lower urinary tract symptoms and/or ejaculatory pain. Diagnostic tests can help differentiate CP/CPPS from other syndromes that come under the heading of prostatitis by ruling out active urinary tract infection and/or prostatic infection with uropathogen by performing urine cultures, Meares-Stamey Four Glass Test, Pre- and Post-Massage Two Glass Test. Asymptomatic inflammatory prostatitis is confirmed through prostate biopsy done for elevated serum prostate-specific antigen levels or abnormal digital rectal examination. Researchers have been unable to link a single etiological factor to the pathogenesis of CP/CPPS, instead a cluster of potential etiologies including atypical bacterial or nanobacterial infection, autoimmunity, neurological dysfunction and pelvic floor muscle dysfunction are most commonly implicated. Initially monotherapy with anti-biotics and alpha adrenergic-blockers can be tried, but its success has only been observed in treatment naïve population. Other pharmacotherapies including phytotherapy, neuromodulatory drugs and anti-inflammatories achieved limited success in trials. Complementary and interventional therapies including acupuncture, myofascial trigger point release and pelvic floor biofeedback have been employed. This review points towards the fact that treatment should be tailored individually for patients based on their symptoms. Patients can be stratified phenotypically based on the UPOINT system constituting of Urinary, Psychosocial, Organ-specific, Infectious, Neurologic/Systemic and symptoms of muscular Tenderness and the treatment algorithm should be proposed accordingly. Treatment of CP/CPPS should be aimed towards treating local as well as central factors causing the symptoms. Surgical intervention can cause significant morbidity and should only be reserved for treatment-refractory patients that have previously failed to respond to multiple drug therapies.

The efficacy of mirodenafil for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome in middle-aged males

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of mirodenafil in middle-aged male patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-eight males with CP/CPPS were randomized to receive either levofloxacin (500 mg/d) (group L, 40 patients) or levofloxacin (500 mg/d) and mirodenafil (50 mg/d) (group ML, 48 patients) for six weeks. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI), and erectile function (EF) domain scores of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire were used to grade symptoms at baseline and 6 weeks after treatment.

RESULTS

The mean change in total IPSS from baseline was higher in group ML than that in group L (group L, -1.1 vs. group ML, -4.3; p<0.05). Significant improvements were also seen in the IPSS voiding subscore (group L, -0.7 vs. group ML, -3.0; p<0.05). Changes observed in the NIH-CPSI of group ML at six weeks were greater than those at baseline (group L, -3.2 vs. group ML, -7.2; p<0.05). Significant improvements were seen in the NIH-CPSI voiding (group L, -0.5 vs. group ML, -1.7; p<0.05) and quality of life domains (group L, -1.0 vs. group ML, -1.8; p<0.05). Group ML showed a significantly greater increase in the IIEF-EF score than did group ML (group L, +0.2 vs. group ML, +7.8; p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Mirodenafil (50 mg once daily) was well tolerated and resulted in significant symptomatic improvement in middle-aged males with CP/CPPS.

Assessing psychological factors, social aspects and psychiatric co-morbidity associated with Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome (CP/CPPS) in men -- a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a chronic pain disease with high prevalence rates and substantial health care costs. An interdisciplinary classification system is commonly used (UPOINT) which includes psychosocial factors. Nevertheless, psychosocial influences on CP/CPPS only recently became a research focus. Therefore, we aimed to synthesize the existing data and to identify further research topics. Then, based on our results, diagnosis and treatment can be improved.

METHODS

In a systematic review conducted according to the PRISMA reporting guidelines we searched different databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO) using the broad search terms "chronic pelvic pain syndrome AND men". Two raters independently screened the literature and assessed the risk of bias.

RESULTS

We included 69 original research articles which considered psychosocial variables. We found studies investigating different psychosocial factors (pain catastrophizing, stress, personality factors, social aspects), co-morbid psychiatric disorders (depression, anxiety and trauma-related disorders, somatization disorder, substance abuse) and Quality of Life (QoL). In addition, there is a high risk of bias in most studies e.g. concerning the study design or the measures.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence suggesting that psychological factors are important in understanding CP/CPPS. However, research concentrated on a few aspects while the others were not covered adequately. We found evidence of a higher number of psychosocial factors and psychiatric co-morbidities than is currently included in the UPOINT system. More high quality research is needed to understand the interplay of psychosocial factors in CP/CPPS. Furthermore, these factors should be incorporated into treatment approaches.

Seasonal changes in symptoms in patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a seasonal follow-up study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether seasonal changes aggravate the symptoms of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS), by serial administration of the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) questionnaire for an extended period.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Seventy-seven men with CP/CPPS were serially evaluated with the Korean version of the NIH-CPSI questionnaire every 2-3 months from October 2008 to October 2012. The mean duration of follow-up was 27.11 ± 10.00 months and the mean number of visits per patient was 14.68 ± 5.33 times during the study.

RESULTS

The number of patients complaining of breakthrough pain during the study was 31 in spring and autumn, nine in summer and 18 in winter. However, there were no significant differences in the mean NIH-CPSI scores across the seasons. In spring, summer and autumn, only urination symptoms correlated with quality of life (QoL) (r(2) = 0.277, p < 0.001). In winter, both pain items and urination symptoms correlated with QoL (pain: r(2) = 0.522, p < 0.001; urination symptoms: r(2) = 0.250, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Although fewer severe pain attacks occurred in summer, the mean NIH-CPSI scores did not differ across seasons. The pain from CP/CPPS had a greater impact on QoL during winter than it did in the other seasons. In addition, pain was a more significant determinant of QoL than urination symptoms during winter.

Comparison of results after fluoroquinolones and combination therapies in type IIIA chronic prostatitis

PURPOSE

We investigated retrospectively the clinical outcomes of the patients with type iii inflammatory chronic prostatitis, who were treated with fluoroquinolones with and without an α-blocker between 2009-2011.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Diagnosis was established with medical history (symptoms presented longer than 3 months within previous 6 months), physical examination, Meares-Stamey test and the questionnaire of the NIH-CPSI. The responses to the treatment were assessed with uroflowmetry test and the questionnaire of NIH-CPSI at initial and after 4 weeks of the treatment. The patients with incomplete data and treatment and who treated with α-blockers and/or antibiotics in the period 4 weeks prior to the therapy started in our clinic and had any surgery of lower urinary tract previously were excluded. The patients were classified under 6 groups; group1=ciprofloxacin, group2=ofloxacin, group3=levofloxacin, group4=ciprofloxacin+tamsulosin, group5=ofloxacin+tamsulosin, group 6=levofloxacin+tamsulosin. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks and Kruskal Wallis test were used for comparison of results. Mann Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction made was used as posthoc (P<.05).

RESULTS

The median scores of NIH-CPSI decreased significantly in all groups (P<.05). Levofloxacin reduced the median total scores of NIH-CPSI more than ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin monotherapies. The combination therapies were better than antibiotic therapies alone and best result was obtained in levofloxacin+tamsulosin combination.

CONCLUSION

Tamsulosin+fluoroquinolone (especially tamsulosin+levofloxacin) combinations yielded better results in both NIH-CPSI scores and peak flow rates.

Management of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS): the studies, the evidence, and the impact

INTRODUCTION

The development of an accepted clinical definition, classification system and validated outcome questionnaire for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) has led to a flurry of clinical trial activity over the last 15 years.

METHODS

Twenty-four of these studies enrolled a homogeneous population of CP/CPPS patients, were prospective randomized placebo or sham controlled, and employed the National Institutes of Health chronic prostatitis symptom index (CPSI) as an outcome parameter.

RESULTS

This review of the evidence and clinical impact from these studies suggests that physician's strict adherence to a rigid evidence-based approach for the treatment of a CP/CPPS patient will result in disappointed patients as well as disappointed physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no one particular treatment that shows significant clinical efficacy to be recommended as a mono-therapy for CP/CPPS. Therefore, the physician must adapt his knowledge and interpretation of the evidence from randomized placebo- and sham-controlled trials to determine what therapy or therapies are best indicated for each individual patient.

Therapeutic intervention for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS): a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) has been treated with several different interventions with limited success. This meta-analysis aims to review all trials reporting on therapeutic intervention for CP/CPPS using the National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI).

METHODS

We searched Medline, PubMed, the Cochrane Pain, Palliative & Supportive Care Trials, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the NIDDK website between 1947 and December 31, 2011 without language or study type restrictions. All RCTs for CP/CPPS lasting at least 6 weeks, with a minimum of 10 participants per arm, and using the NIH-CPSI score, the criterion standard for CP/CPPS, as an outcome measure were included. Data was extracted from each study by two independent reviewers. Gillbraith and I-squared plots were used for heterogeneity testing and Eggers and Peters methods for publication bias. Quality was assessed using a component approach and meta-regression was used to analyze sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Mepartricin, percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS), and triple therapy comprised of doxazosin + ibuprofen + thiocolchicoside (DIT) resulted in clinically and statistically significant reduction in NIH-CPSI total score. The same agents and aerobic exercise resulted in clinically and statistically significant NIH-CPSI pain domain score reduction. Acupuncture, DIT, and PTNS were found to produce statistically and clinically significant reductions in the NIH-CPSI voiding domain. A statistically significant placebo effect was found for all outcomes and time analysis showed that efficacy of all treatments increased over time. Alpha-blockers, antibiotics, and combinations of the two failed to show statistically or clinically significant NIH-CPSI reductions.

CONCLUSION

Results from this meta-analysis reflect our current inability to effectively manage CP/CPPS. Clinicians and researchers must consider placebo effect and treatment efficacy over time and design studies creatively so we can more fully elucidate the etiology and role of therapeutic intervention in CP/CPPS.

α-blockers, antibiotics and anti-inflammatories have a role in the management of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Study Type - Therapy (systematic review) Level of Evidence 1a. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Individual clinical trials evaluating antibiotics, anti-inflammatories and α-blockers for the treatment of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome have shown only modest or even no benefits for patients compared with placebo, yet we continue to use these agents in selected patients with some success in clinical practice. This network meta-analysis of current evidence from all available randomized placebo-controlled trials with similar inclusion criteria and outcome measures shows that these '3-As' of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome treatment (antibiotics, anti-inflammatories and α-blockers) do offer benefits to some patients, particularly if we use them strategically in selected individuals.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an updated network meta-analysis mapping α-blockers, antibiotics and anti-inflammatories (the 3-As) in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). • To use the results of this meta-analysis to comment on the role of the 3-As in clinical practice.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We updated a previous review including only randomized controlled studies employing the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) as one of the outcomes to compare treatment effects in CP/CPPS patients. • A longitudinal mixed regression model (network meta-analysis) was applied to indirectly assess multiple treatment comparisons (i.e. α-blockers, antibiotics, anti-inflammatory/immune modulation therapies, α-blockers plus antibiotics, and placebo).

RESULTS

Nineteen studies (1669 subjects) were eligible for analysis. • α-blockers, antibiotics and anti-inflammatory/immune modulation therapies were associated with significant improvement in symptoms when compared with placebo, with mean differences of total CPSI of -10.8 (95% CI -13.2 to -8.3; P < 0.001), -9.7 (95% CI -14.2 to -5.3; P < 0.001) and -1.7 (95% CI -3.2 to -0.2; P= 0.032) respectively, while α-blockers plus antibiotics resulted in the greatest CPSI difference (-13.6, 95% CI -16.7 to -10.6; P < 0.001). • With respect to responder analysis compared with placebo, anti-inflammatories showed the greatest response rates (risk ratio 1.7, 95% CI 1.4-2.1; P < 0.001) followed by α-blockers (risk ratio 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.8; P= 0.013) and antibiotics (risk ratio 1.2, 95% CI 0.7-1.9; P= 0.527).

CONCLUSIONS

α-blockers, antibiotics and/or anti-inflammatory/immune modulation therapy appear to be beneficial for some patients with CP/CPPS. • The magnitude of effect and the disconnect between mean CPSI decrease and response rates compared with placebo suggest that directed multimodal therapy, rather than mono-therapy, with these agents should be considered for optimal management of CP/CPPS.

The evolution of orgasmic pain (dysorgasmia) following radical prostatectomy

INTRODUCTION

It is recognized that some patients experience painful orgasms known as dysorgasmia after radical prostatectomy (RP). This problem poses a barrier to satisfactory sexual relations for some couples. However, the natural history of this condition remains unknown.

AIM

To assess the evolution of dysorgasmia in patients who underwent RP.

METHODS

The study population included men who had been seen initially within 6 months after RP and complained of postoperative dysorgasmia and opted for no medical therapy with postoperative follow-up at least 24 months, and were seen at least twice over 2 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

A proprietary dysorgasmia frequency scale and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were used at each visit.

RESULTS

Data from 702 patients who had RP and presented for sexual function evaluation between 2002 and 2008 were prospectively collected and analyzed at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Of the 702 patients, 84 (12%) complained of dysorgasmia. Mean patient age was 64 ± 16 years. Mean time interval since RP to initial sexual medicine interview was 2.2 ± 3.2 months. Mean number of visits was 4 ± 1.4. For the 84 patients who had dysorgasmia, mean dysorgasmia frequency and VAS score for pain at initial interview were 3.9 and 4.1, respectively. At 24 months, a statistically significant decrease in symptoms occurred, with 72%, 26%, and 7% of patients still complaining of pain at 12, 18, and 24 months, respectively. At 6 months, 26% of patients had a VAS score ≥6/10 and at 24 months this figure was 16%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data provide evidence that dysorgasmia decreases in frequency and degree over time after RP. These data are in support of a surveillance strategy for all but the most bothered patients with dysorgasmia after RP.

Identification, pharmacologic considerations, and management of prostatitis

BACKGROUND

Prostatitis is a collection of signs and symptoms that occur as a result of inflammation or swelling of the prostate gland. There are many different causes for prostatitis, including infection; occasionally no clear etiology for the inflammation is found. Effective treatment often depends on identification of the cause, but a microbiologic organism is not always detectable, especially in cases of chronic prostatitis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article was to review identification and treatment options for prostatitis, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions.

METHODS

Relevant information was identified through a search of MEDLINE (1966-June 2010), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-June 2010), and EMBASE (1947-June 2010). Randomized, controlled trials that examined prostate cancer, benign prostatic hypertrophy, or procedures related to the prostate (ie, biopsies) were excluded.

RESULTS

A working classification system for prostatitis was developed in 1999, but there are few randomized controlled trials that distinguish between the various treatment options. Bacterial prostatitis can be acute or chronic but always requires some degree of antimicrobial therapy. Pharmacologic features of fluoroquinolones make them the preferred agents for most patients. These antibiotics can become trapped in a chronically inflamed prostate due to pH differences between prostatic tissue and serum. Many fluoroquinolones have penetration ratios (prostate level:serum level) of up to 4:1. A study in European men (N = 117) who received levofloxacin 500 mg/d with a diagnosis of chronic bacterial prostatitis demonstrated clinical success rates of 92% (95% CI 84.8%-96.5%), 77.4% (95% CI, 68.2-84.9%), 66.0% (95% CI, 56.2%-75.0%), and 61.9% (95% CI, 51.9%-71.2%) at 5-12 days, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after treatment. Additionally, there have been numerous randomized, placebo-controlled trials in patients with chronic prostatitis that have studied α-blockers, steroid inhibitors, anti-inflammatory agents, and bioflavonoids. Treatment responses to α-blockers appear to be greater with longer durations of therapy in α-blocker-naïve patients (National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index [NIH-CPSI] score reduction of at least 3.6 points after 6 weeks of tamsulosin therapy [P = 0.04] and up to 14.3 and 9.9 point NIH-CPSI score reductions with 14 weeks of terazosin and 24 weeks of alfuzosin therapy, respectively [P = 0.01 for both]). Combination therapy with an α-blocker, an anti-inflammatory, and a muscle relaxant does not appear to offer significant advantages over monotherapy (12.7 vs 12.4 point reduction in NIH-CPSI scores) and a stepwise approach to therapy involving antibiotics followed by bioflavonoids and then α-blockers appears to effectively reduce symptoms for up to 1 year in patients with chronic prostatitis (mean NIH-CPSI point reduction of 9.5 points compared with baseline, P < 0.0001). Patients who have had multiple unsuccessful treatment regimens may benefit from direct stimulation of the pelvic muscles through electromagnetic or electroacupuncture therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostatitis can resemble various other medical conditions but proper classification and an understanding of the pharmacologic features and expectations of the medications used to treat it can help identify effective treatment strategies. Fluoroquinolones are the preferred agents for treating bacterial causes of prostatitis and have demonstrated efficacy in some cases of chronic prostatitis when an organism has not been identified. However, the use of agents with anti-inflammatory or antiadrenergic properties may be necessary in combination with or after trying antimicrobial agents.

Chronic prostatitis: approaches for best management

Prostatitis is a prevalent condition that encompasses a large array of clinical symptoms with significant impacts on men's life. The diagnosis and treatment of this disorder presents numerous challenges for urologists, most notably, a lack of specific and effective diagnostic methods. Chronic bacterial prostatitis is successfully treated with appropriate antibiotics that penetrate the prostate and kill the causative organisms. Prostatitis category III (chronic pelvic pain syndrome) is common, very bothersome, and enigmatic. Symptoms are usually prolonged and, generally speaking, treatment results are unsatisfactory. During the last decade, research has focused on the distress caused by the condition, but although our knowledge has certainly increased, there have been no real breakthroughs; controversies and many unanswered questions remain. Furthermore, the optimal management of category III prostatitis is not known. Conventional prolonged courses of antibiotic therapy have not proven to be efficacious. Novel therapies providing some evidence for efficacy include alpha-blocker, anti-inflammatory phytotherapy, physiotherapy, neuroleptics, and others, each offering therapeutic mechanisms. A stepwise approach involving multimodal therapy is often successful for treating patients. The UPOINT technique has been used to clinically phenotype these patients and drive the appropriate selection of multimodal therapy.

New paradigms in understanding chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common male pain condition that is associated with significant discomfort and disability. Despite significant efforts, there remains no definitive etiology or treatment of the spectrum of pelvic symptoms reported by these patients. The purpose of this review is to summarize important clinical and scientific findings related to CP/CPPS from the previous 2 years, and to evaluate their impact on our understanding of, and approach to, the disease.

The effects of transrectal radiofrequency hyperthermia on patients with chronic prostatitis and the changes of MDA, NO, SOD, and Zn levels in pretreatment and posttreatment

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of transrectal radiofrequency hyperthermia (TRFH) in 159 patients with chronic prostatitis (CP) and explore the changes of reactive oxygen species in CP patients pretreatment and posttreatment.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with CP were randomized to 6 weeks of tamsulosin plus clarithromycin, TRFH, or TRFH with tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group. The primary outcome measure was evaluated by the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index. Malondiadehyde (MDA), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and nitrogen monoxide (NO) were measured by biochemical assay. Zinc (Zn) content was assayed by atomical spectrophotography.

RESULTS

All 105 patients in the TRFH or TRFH with tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group showed statistically significant improvement of pain, quality of life, and micturition domains compared with the tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group. Regardless of type IIIa or type IIIb CP, there was a significant improvement in the TRFH or TRFH with tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group compared with tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group (P<.05). Compared with pretreatment, MDA, NO, and Zn were decreased in type II and IIIa, whereas SOD was only increased significantly in type II (P<.05).

CONCLUSION

Our study reveals TRFH as an effective therapy option for CP, especially type IIIa or type IIIb CP. The results of TRFH with tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group was superior to the TRFH group or the tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group alone. In comparison with pretreatment, differences in reactive oxygen species levels and Zn in CP patients suggest that these factors could be used as a biomarker to evaluate the symptoms of CP and the effects of treatment.

Tamsulosin Monotherapy versus Combination Therapy with Antibiotics or Anti-Inflammatory Agents in the Treatment of Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome

Purpose

Chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) is treated by use of various protocols. We compared tamsulosin monotherapy with tamsulosin in combination with antibiotics or anti-inflammatory agents and evaluated the efficacy of these treatments in patients with CPPS.

Methods

Patients (n=107) who were younger than 55 years and diagnosed with CPPS were randomly assigned to treatment with tamsulosin at 0.2 mg (group A), tamsulosin at 0.2 mg plus anti-inflammatory drugs (group B) or tamsulosin at 0.2 mg plus antibiotics (group C) daily. We applied the National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) to evaluate 100 patients who were treated for 12 weeks (7 withdrew). Scores of the three groups were compared by analysis of variance and we also evaluated subscores, which included pain, voiding and quality of life (QoL).

Results

All three groups showed statistically significant decreases in NIH-CPSI score, IPSS and subscore scores (P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups except for the QoL domain of the IPSS (group A vs. C; P<0.01).

Conclusions

Tamsulosin monotherapy for 12 weeks was effective for treating patients with CPPS, compared with combination therapy with antibiotics or anti-inflammatory drugs.

Silodosin for men with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: results of a phase II multicenter, double-blind, placebo controlled study

PURPOSE

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of 2 doses of silodosin vs placebo in men with moderate to severe abacterial chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome who had not been treated previously with α-blockers for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase II study, men 18 years old or older with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome, a total National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index score of 15 or greater and a National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index pain score of 8 or greater received 4 or 8 mg silodosin, or placebo once daily for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was change from baseline to week 12 in National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index total score.

RESULTS

Of 151 patients (mean age 48 years) 52 received 4 mg silodosin, 45 received 8 mg silodosin and 54 received placebo. Silodosin 4 mg was associated with a significant decrease in total National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index score (mean ± SD change -12.1 ± 9.3) vs placebo (-8.5 ± 7.2, p = 0.0224), including a decrease in urinary symptom (-2.2 ± 2.7, placebo -1.3 ± 3.0, p = 0.0102) and quality of life (-4.1 ± 3.1, placebo -2.7 ± 2.5, p = 0.0099) subscores. The 4 mg dose of silodosin also significantly increased Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 12 physical component scores (4.2 ± 8.1, placebo 1.7 ± 9.0, p = 0.0492). During global response assessment 56% of patients receiving 4 mg silodosin vs 29% receiving placebo reported moderate or marked improvement (p = 0.0069). Increasing the dose of silodosin to 8 mg resulted in no incremental treatment effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Silodosin 4 mg relieved symptoms and improved quality of life in men with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome but its efficacy requires confirmation in additional studies.

Pharmacotherapy of prostatitis

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Prostatitis is a prevalent and morbid condition with a significant impact on a patient's quality of life. The four distinct prostatitis syndromes have different pathophysiologies, therapy and prognosis. Acute and chronic bacterial prostatitis is best treated with appropriate antibiotics that penetrate the prostate and kill the causative organisms. The most challenging category to treat is category III or chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

AREAS COVERED IN THE REVIEW

This review covers the categories of prostatitis and currently recommended therapies, as well as novel approaches on the horizon.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

Knowledge of the current framework for the diagnosis and management of the diverse prostatitis spectrum.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Prostatitis is a diverse group of syndromes. Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome is a multifactorial syndrome that requires a multimodal approach to effectively treat the patient. The UPOINT technique is used to clinically phenotype these patients and drive the selection of multimodal therapy.

Phenotypic approach to the management of the chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

• Our traditional approach to managing the chronic prostatitis (CP) syndromes has not been very successful for many of our patients. • Our developing understanding of CP/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) as a heterogeneous syndrome rather than a homogenous disease has allowed us to develop treatment strategies based on individual patient characteristics. • By considering each patient as a unique individual and tailoring treatments to a specific patient's clinical 'phenotype' we improve our therapeutic outcomes.

[Specific treatments for chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic pelvic pain syndrome]

OBJECTIVE

To review the treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A review of the literature was performed by searching the Medline database (National Library of Medicine). Search terms were either Medical subject heading (MeSH) keywords (antibacterial agents, pelvic pain, placebos, prostatitis, treatment) or terms derived from the title or abstract. Search terms were used alone or in combinations by using the "AND" operator. The literature search was conducted from 1990 to the present time.

RESULTS

The treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis is based on the use of antibiotics, primarily fluoroquinolones, for 4 to 6 weeks, but no consensus has been reached concerning the standard treatment of CP/CPPS. A review of the literature failed to identify any recognized and validated treatments for CP/CPPS, but several conclusions can be drawn: placebo gives satisfactory results in a considerable number of patients; antibiotics are not recommended; alpha-blocking agents may be effective in recently diagnosed, previously untreated patients, provided they are prescribed for 12 weeks to 6 months; invasive surgery of the prostate and bladder neck is not recommended.

CONCLUSION

Progress in the treatment of CP/CPPS will require more extensive basic and clinical research. Only randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials including a large number of patients, and using the NIH-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index questionnaire (NIH-CPSI) as evaluation tool will be able to provide reliable conclusions. The use of patient subgroups selected according to the predominant symptoms could be contributive.