Efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave therapy for the treatment of chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a randomized, controlled trial

Low intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy for chronic pelvic pain syndrome: Long-term follow-up

Chronic prostatitis (CP) is one of the diseases that reduce the quality of life (QoL) of young men. To date, there is no consensus on the management of these patients. It is essential to continue research into the treatment of CP, despite the use of various therapies, including low-energy extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT). The main objective of this study is to observe and record the clinical symptomatology of patients during a 48-week follow-up period after ESWT treatment. Between 2019 and 2021, 28 patients with type IIIB CP/chronic pelvic pain syndrome were enrolled. Patients underwent ESWT once weekly for 4 weeks (3,000 individual sessions, maximum total energy flux density 0.25 mJ/mm2, frequency 3 Hz). Participants were assessed at 0, 4, 12, 24, 36 and 48 weeks post-treatment using the visual analogue scale (VAS), National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI), and International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)-5. The mean age of patients was 47.1 ± 13.7 years (range 28-4 years). The positive effect of LI-ESWT was reflected in improvements in VAS, NIH-CPSI, and IIEF-5 scores. Regression of patients' symptoms was observed as early as 4 weeks after treatment. The greatest progress was achieved at week 24. In addition, a slight worsening was observed at week 36 and 48, with stable progress. The treatment significantly improved the QoL of the patients, with the most significant improvement in the VAS score. In conclusion, this treatment approach is safe, most effective in the first 6 months. Thereafter, the efficacy of the treatment diminishes, but is sustained over a longer period.

The efficacy and safety of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave treatment combined with or without medications in Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of Li-ESWT combined with or without medications for patients with Chronic prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome (CP/CPPS).

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted of PUBMED, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from inception to February 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy and safety of Li-ESWT with or without the combination of medications compared with the control group. The National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI), Visual Analogue Scale/Score (VAS), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), and International prostate symptom score (IPSS) were used to assess the improvements of symptoms in CP/CPPS patients.

RESULTS

651 patients from 12 randomized controlled studies were included in this study. The total NIH-CPSI scores, pain domain scores, and quality of life (QOL) scores were significantly lower in the Li-ESWT group than those in the control group at the termination of treatment, and 1, 4, 12, and 24 weeks after treatment. And these scores were significantly reduced in the Li-ESWT group than in baselines. In the subgroup analysis, reductions of these scores lasted longer and were greater in Li-ESWT combined with medications than in Li-ESWT alone. In the Li-ESWT group, the VAS score; IIEF score; and IPSS score were significant improvements than those in control group at the termination of treatment, and 1, 4, and 12 weeks after treatment; 4, 12, and 24 weeks after treatment; and 1, 4, and 12 weeks after treatment, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Li-ESWT is a safe, non-invasive, and effective option for patients with CP/CPPS, whether combined with medications or not, should be recommended for widespread use in clinical practice.

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.

New Frontiers of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Medicine in Urology from Bench to Clinical Studies

A shock wave (SW), which carries energy and propagates through a medium, is a type of continuous transmitted sonic wave that can achieve rapid energy transformations. SWs have been applied for many fields of medical science in various treatment settings. In urology, high-energy extracorporeal SWs have been used to disintegrate urolithiasis for 30 years. However, at lower energy levels, SWs enhance the expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS), proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), chemoattractant factors, and the recruitment of progenitor cells, and inhibit inflammatory molecules. Low energy extracorporeal shock wave (LESW) therapy has been used in urology for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS), interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS), overactive bladder, stress urinary incontinence, and erectile dysfunction through the mechanisms of anti-inflammation, neovascularization, and tissue regeneration. Additionally, LESW have been proven to temporarily increase tissue permeability and facilitate intravesical botulinum toxin delivery for treating overactive bladders in animal studies and in a human clinical trial. LESW assisted drug delivery was also suggested to have a synergistic effect in combination with cisplatin to improve the anti-cancer effect for treating urothelial cancer in an in vitro and in vivo study. LESW assisted drug delivery in uro-oncology is an interesting suggestion, but no comprehensive clinical trials have been conducted as of yet. Taken together, LESW is a promising method for the treatment of various diseases in urology. However, further investigation with a large scale of clinical studies is necessary to confirm the real role of LESW in clinical use. This article provides information on the basics of SW physics, mechanisms of action on biological systems, and new frontiers of SW medicine in urology.

Low intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy for chronic pelvic pain syndrome patients with erectile dysfunction

INTRODUCTION

In this study, the efficacy of low intensity shock wave therapy (LSWT) in improving symptoms of chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) and erectile dysfunction (ED) was investigated.

METHODS

Men diagnosed with CPPS and ED (n = 50) were prescribed with LSWT. The LSWT was administered in 10 sessions over the course of 5 weeks at 3,000 pulses with .25 mJ/mm2 energy flow and 5 Hz frequency. Outcome parameters were measured before and after LSWT.

RESULTS

Clinical symptoms related to CPPS and ED were measured using four validated questionnaires namely National Institute of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI), the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM). The effect of LSWT on each of the three domains of NIH-CPSI, namely Pain, Symptoms, and Quality of Life (QoL) were also analyzed. Uroflowmetry was measured to assess LSWT effect on urine voiding. The mean baseline CPPS symptoms on NIH-CPSI domains of pain, symptoms and QoL were 9.92 ± 5.72 (mean ± SD), 5.14 ± 14.5, and 8.02 ± 3.17, respectively. LSWT resulted in significant reduction of CPPS symptoms on all NIH-CPSI domains (Pain = .9 ± 1.37; Symptoms = .74 ± 1.03; QoL = 1.16 ± 1.78). The baseline means of CPPS symptoms on IIEF, IPSS, and SHIM were 45.42 ± 16.24, 24.68 ± 9.28, and 14.28 ± 6.02, respectively. LSWT significant improved CPPS symptoms on IIEF (49.48 ± 28.30) and IPSS (9.04 ± 7.01) but not on SHIM (16.02 ± 9.85). No statistically significant differences were observed with all uroflowmetry parameters.

CONCLUSION

The current study demonstrated for the first time the safety and efficacy of LSWT administered in 10 sessions over 5 weeks in improving symptoms of CPPS and ED without causing any significant adverse effect to the patient.

The Efficacy and Safety of Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy versus Acupuncture in the Management of Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome: Evidence Based on a Network Meta-analysis

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) and acupuncture therapy for patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).

We searched electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and web of science from its inception to June 1, 2021. The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ESWT and acupuncture in the management of CP/CPPS were identified. A network meta-analysis was conducted with the software of STATA 14.0.

Nine RCTs with 525 patients were enrolled in our analysis. The results revealed that both ESWT and acupuncture were significantly better than the sham procedure in the outcomes of total score of NIH-CPSI, pain subscore, urinary symptoms subscore, QoL subscore, IPSS score, the IIEF score and response rates (p < .05). Both ESWT and acupuncture were well-tolerated and had no obviously increased adverse events. Compared with acupuncture, ESWT was associated with better short term (<4w) and mid-term (8-12 w) efficacy of total score, pain subscore, urinary symptoms subscore, and QoL subscore of NIH-CPSI, IPSS score, IIEF score, and response rate. However, ESWT did not present better long-term (<24 w) outcomes than acupuncture in total score, pain subscore, urinary symptoms subscore, and QoL subscore of NIH-CPSI.

Both ESWT and acupuncture were effective and well-tolerated in the management of CP/CPPS. ESWT seemed to have better short (<4 w) and mid-term (8-12 w) efficacy but similar long-term (>24 w) efficacy than acupuncture.

Contemporary Management of Chronic Prostatitis

Chronic prostatitis (CP) is a common condition, yet remains a challenge to treat in clinical practice due to the heterogeneity of symptoms. The aim of this article is to undertake a narrative review using key research papers in this field in order to develop a treatment algorithm and research recommendations for the management of type II and type III prostatitis taking a broader look at interventions beyond those recommended in the European Association of Urology Guidelines. A search was performed using multiple databases and trial registries with no language restrictions. Searches were completed on March 1, 2021, with a focus on randomized controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analyses, and systematic reviews. However, in areas with a dearth of such studies, we included case series and observational studies, thus allowing us to assess current levels of evidence and areas of potential research. We identified and reviewed 63 studies. The level of evidence and the quality of trials were assessed and reported. Research recommendations, where applicable, were also highlighted. CP/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) is a heterogenous term referring to diverse symptomology that requires tailored treatments depending on the patients' complaints. After a review of the evidence available, we present a treatment algorithm that is based on the much-discussed UPOINT (urinary symptoms, psychosocial dysfunction, organ-specific findings, infection, neurologic/systemic, and tenderness of muscles) framework. Future studies should focus on multimodal therapy based on such frameworks and provide the future direction of this complex condition.

Efficacy and safety evaluation of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy on prostatitis-like symptoms: An open-label, single-arm trial

The present work aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (Li-ESWT) on patients with prostatitis-like symptoms (PLS). Patients with PLS were recruited and received four-week Li-ESWT (once per week), which was conducted at a frequency of 3 Hz with a preferred energy flow density of 0.25 mJ/mm² . The scores of the National Institute of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptoms Index (NIH-CPSI), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) were recorded to assess the remission of disease in the 0, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 8th and 16th weeks. A decrease of the NIH-CPSI score ≥6 was regarded as the effectiveness standard of Li-ESWT. Among 91 enrolled patients, the scores of all validated questionnaires presented significant improvements in the 4th week (p < .05) compared with that in baseline, except for IIEF-5. The treatment effective rates in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 8th and 16th weeks were 28.57%, 38.46%, 47.25%, 51.65%, 57.30%, 68.18% and 69.44%, respectively. No pronounced undesirable side effect has occurred. Li-ESWT is effective and safe in treating PLS. The efficacy can be maintained within three months.

Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy for male chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

A systematic review of the evidence was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (LI-ESWT) for patients with chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS).

Methods

A comprehensive search was undertaken of the Cochrane Register, PubMed, and Embase databases for controlled trials that evaluated patients with CPPS who were treated with LI-ESWT and that were published before August 2019. The National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) was the most frequently used tool to evaluate the treatment efficacy of LI-ESWT. The NIH-CPSI comprises subscales for pain [using a visual analog scale (VAS)], urinary function, and quality of life (QoL).

Results

Six studies analyzing 317 patients were published from 2009 to 2019. The overall meta-analysis of the data indicated that LI-ESWT demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of CPPS at 12 weeks [risk difference (RD): 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.28–0.63; P<0.00001]. The studies were divided into 3 groups based on time after LI-ESWT (1, 12, and 24 weeks) and were compared in total NIH-CPSI scores, QoL, VAS scores, and urinary symptoms. The total NIH-CPSI scores, QoL, VAS scores, and urinary symptom scores improved significantly at 12 weeks after LI-ESWT (P<0.05), but not at 1 week or 24 weeks (P>0.05).

Conclusions

Based on these studies, LI-ESWT may transiently improve the total NIH-CPSI scores, QoL, pain scores, and urinary symptom scores of patients with CPPS. Future research may elucidate the mechanisms underlying the effects of LI-ESWT on CPPS. Well-designed and long-term multicenter randomized controlled trials are urgently needed to estimate the real potential and ultimate use of these devices in patients with CPPS.

Efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shockwave therapy for the treatment of chronic non-bacterial prostatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) is one of the most common outpatient urological diagnoses, and its incidence is increasing. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) has been suggested for relieving local perineal symptoms associated with chronic prostatitis/CPPS. Despite several treatment methods, no causal or standardized treatment is available for CPPS. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety profile of ESWT for the treatment of chronic non-bacterial prostatitis.

Materials and methods

Studies were collected using four search engines (Pubmed, Cochrane, ScienceDirect, and EBSCOHost), on May 16, 2020; and assessed based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Two reviewers performed study selection. Studies were then analyzed using Review Manager 5.3 for the meta-analysis.

Results

Seventy-four publications were initially retrieved, and three studies were considered for both qualitative and quantitative analyses. From these studies, we found that the use of ESWT was significantly associated with decreased pain domain (mean difference: -3.93; 95% confidence interval [CI] -5.13, -2.73; p<0.001), improved urinary score (mean difference: -1.79; 95% CI -2.38, -1.21; p<0.001), improved quality of life (mean difference: -1.71; 95% CI -2.12, -1.31; p<0.001), and improved National Institutes of Health chronic prostatitis symptom index (NIH-CPSI) score (mean difference: -5.45; 95% CI -5.74, -5.16; p<0.001) after 12 weeks of treatment.

Conclusion

ESWT is efficacious and safe in reducing pain and improving urinary condition, NIH-CPSI score, and quality of life in patients with chronic non-bacterial prostatitis.

Evaluation of a low-intensity shockwave therapy for chronic prostatitis type IIIb/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a double-blind randomized sham-controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is no efficacious treatment method for chronic prostatitis type IIIb/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). Aim of the study was to investigate and compare the efficacy and safety of low-intensity shockwave therapy (LiST) vs. sham treatment in CP/CPPS patients.

METHODS

Patients with CP/CPPS diagnosis were randomized in this prospective, sham-controlled, double-blind study either to the active groups (Group B, C) who received 5000 shockwaves per session with energy flux density 0.1 mJ/mm² or to the sham group (Group A) who received 5000 shockwaves from a visually identical sham probe. All groups underwent six sessions (once/week). LiST effects on pain, micturition, quality of life (QoL), and erectile function were evaluated at 4, 12, and 24 weeks after treatment. The parameters were investigated using validated questionnaires. Uroflowmetry and post void residual calculation were performed at baseline and at 4- and 12-week FU visit. Prostate mpMRI and PSA measurement were performed at baseline and 12-week FU visit.

RESULTS

Overall, 45 men were randomized to the active (n = 30) and sham groups (n = 15). Regarding impact of LiST in National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) total, pain, and QoL subdomains scores a clear and persistent in all FU timepoints improvement was found compared to sham treatment. NIH-CPSI urinary subdomain, International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS], PSA, and mpMRI-PIRADS scores did not differ between the two groups. The mean difference between the LiST and sham group in the change of the NIH-CPSI pain-domain score (Q1-4) from baseline to 12 weeks after final treatment which was 3.3 (95% CI, 1.8, 4.7). Perineal LiST was easy and safe to perform without anesthesia or any side-effects.

CONCLUSIONS

LiST seems to be a safe and effective treatment option for CP/CPPS, considerably improving pain and quality of life. Lack of any side-effects, and the potential for repetition make LiST a promising treatment choice for CP/CPPS patients.

Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy for III B chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Background

To analyze the efficiency of low-intensity shock wave therapy (LI-ESWT) for patients with III B chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS).

Methods

The study included an uncontrolled population of 32 patients who had suffered with CPPS for ≥3 months. LI-ESWT was performed without anesthesia via a perineal approach. The operation was carried out in four weeks by administering 12,000 shock waves. Using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and NIH-developed Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI), subsequent tests were performed at 1, 2, 4, and 12 weeks after the first LI-ESWT session.

Results

All patients who received the four week course as treatment responded actively on the pain VAS and the NIH-CPSI, and both were significantly improved (P<0.05). Compared with the baseline parameters, the NIH-CPSI total score and VAS exhibited substantial improvement at 4 and 12 weeks, where a total improvement at four weeks was reached. It is easy and safe to perform LI-ESWT without anesthesia on an outpatient basis.

Conclusions

LI-ESWT should be regarded as a promising new therapy for CPPS, as it is convenient to perform without any side-effects.

Radial Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy as a Novel Agent for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Refractory to Current Medical Therapy

This study aimed to assess efficacy and safety data from pilot trials of the radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT) to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) refractory to current medical therapy. A total of 29 men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of BPH who had responded poorly to medical therapy for at least 6 months and were poor surgical candidates were enrolled. Each participant was treated with rESWT once a week for 8 weeks, each by 2000 impulses at 2.0 bar and 10 hertz of frequency. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), and International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) were evaluated before treatment, after the fourth and eighth rESWT, and 3 months after the end of treatment. Peak urinary flow ( Q_max) and postvoid residual (PVR) were assessed. Safety was also documented. Statistically significant clinical improvements were reported for IPSS, QoL, and IIEF-5 after treatment, and those were sustained until 3 months follow-up. Q_max and PVR improved evidently at 8 weeks with a 63% and 70% improvement, respectively. The only adverse event was the occasional perineum pain or discomfort, which usually disappeared within 3 days. The rESWT may be an effective, safe, and noninvasive treatment for symptomatic BPH in selected patients whose medical treatment has faced failure and are poor surgical candidates.

Low Energy Shock Wave Therapy Inhibits Inflammatory Molecules and Suppresses Prostatic Pain and Hypersensitivity in a Capsaicin Induced Prostatitis Model in Rats

The effect of low energy shock wave (LESW) therapy on the changes of inflammatory molecules and pain reaction was studied in a capsaicin (10 mM, 0.1 cc) induced prostatitis model in rats. Intraprostatic capsaicin injection induced a pain reaction, including closing of the eyes, hypolocomotion, and tactile allodynia, which effects were ameliorated by LESW treatment. LESW therapy (2Hz, energy flux density of 0.12 mJ/mm²) at 200 and 300 shocks significantly decreased capsaicin-induced inflammatory reactions, reflected by a reduction of tissue edema and inflammatory cells, COX-2 and TNF-α stained positive cells, however, the therapeutic effects were not observed at 100 shocks treated group. Capsaicin-induced IL-1β, COX-2, IL-6, caspase-1, and NGF upregulation on day 3 and 7, while NALP1 and TNF-α upregulation was observed on day 7. LESW significantly suppressed the expression of IL-1β, COX-2, caspase-1, NGF on day 3 and IL-1β, TNF-α, COX-2, NALP1, caspase-1, NGF expression on day 7 in a dose-dependent fashion. LESW has no significant effect on IL-6 expression. Intraprostatic capsaicin injection activates inflammatory molecules and induces prostatic pain and hypersensitivity, which effects were suppressed by LESW. These findings might be the potential mechanisms of LESW therapy for nonbacterial prostatitis in humans.

Male CP/CPPS: where do we stand?

INTRODUCTION

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS), commonly encountered in urologic practice, carries with it a stigma of poor understanding, ineffective treatment, and significant financial and quality of life burden.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This clinically practical review is based on the authors' personal clinical experience in interpretation and application of currently available evidence.

RESULTS

Significant progress has been made in terms of classification and evaluation of the disease, leading to encouraging improvements in treatment outcomes. The Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (CPSI) is a helpful tool in clinical evaluation and has proven invaluable for research purposes, while UPOINT has demonstrated the heterogeneity of the disease and provides physicians with a uniquely patient-centered approach to treatment. The importance of the microbiome in the evaluation of CP/CPPS patients has yet to be fully appreciated. While personalized, multi-modal therapy appears to be the key to treatment, the addition of pelvic floor physiotherapy (PFPT) with injection of trigger points, and psychosocial therapies to the multi-modal approach armamentarium are promising advances. Innovative interventional approaches are encouraging but require study.

CONCLUSIONS

While encouraging therapies have been added to personalized, multi-modal treatment strategies, newer innovative therapies appear promising for improved treatment of CP/CPPS patients.

Efficacy of Radial Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy for Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial

This study aims to determine the effect of radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT) versus drug when treating chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS; type III B chronic prostatitis). The study included 45 participants with CPPS, divided into two groups: Group I comprised 25 participants, who were treated with rESWT (3,000 pulses each; pressure: 1.8-2.0 bar; frequency: 10 Hz) once a week; Group II consisted of 20 participants who received a combination of an α-blocker and an anti-inflammatory agent. Participants were treated for 8 weeks. The assessments were done before treatment, after the fourth and eighth rESWT, and 3 months after the end of treatment by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, National Institutes of Health-developed Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), and International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5). Both groups of participants showed statistically significant improvement in all the assessments ( p < .001) after the treatment, with significantly better results in Group I in NIH-CPSI ( p < .001). The recurrence rate of symptoms in Group I at 3 months after end of treatment was much lower than that in Group II (4% vs. 50%, p < .001). This prospectively nonrandomized, control study revealed perineal rESWT as a new therapy option for CPPS with statistically significant effects in comparison to drugs at least for 3 months after cessation of treatment.

Effect of radial shock wave on chronic pelvic pain syndrome/chronic prostatitis

[Purpose] This study aimed to evaluate the effect of radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT) on patients with chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS). [Participants and Methods] Forty male CPPS patients were randomly assigned into either an rESWT group or a control group. The first group was treated with rESWT two times per week for four weeks with a protocol 3,000 pulse, 12 Hz at 3 to 5 bar. The control group was treated with the same protocol, but the device’s probe had been turned off. The follow-up assessment was done using the National Institutes of Health-developed Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) before treatment, as well as one week, four weeks, and 8 weeks after treatment. [Results] No significant difference was found in terms of age, sub-domain, or the total score of the NIH-CPSI between the rESWT group and the control group at the baseline. A statistically significant decrease was determined in the pain domain, urine score, quality of life, and the total NIH-CPSI score of the rESWT group at all post-treatment time points. All domains and the total score of the NIH-CPSI at all three follow-up time points decreased more significantly in the rESWT group as compared to the control group. [Conclusion] The findings of this study confirmed that rESWT is an effective method for treating CPPS.

Non-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.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of non-pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases, 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 August 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available non-pharmacological interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies, performed statistical analyses and rated quality of evidence (QoE) according to the GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 unique studies with 3290 men with CP/CPPS across 23 comparisons.1. Acupuncture: (three studies, 204 participants) based on short-term follow-up, acupuncture probably leads to clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with sham procedure (mean difference (MD) in total NIH-CPSI score -5.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.32 to -4.26, high QoE). Acupuncture may result in little to no difference in adverse events (low QoE). Acupuncture may not reduce sexual dysfunction when compared with sham procedure (MD in the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Scale -0.50, 95% CI -3.46 to 2.46, low QoE). Acupuncture may also lead to a clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with standard medical therapy (MD -6.05, 95% CI -7.87 to -4.24, two studies, 78 participants, low QoE). We found no information regarding quality of life, depression or anxiety.2. Lifestyle modifications: (one study, 100 participants) based on short-term follow-up, lifestyle modifications may be associated with a reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (risk ratio (RR) for improvement in NIH-CPSI scores 3.90, 95% CI 2.20 to 6.92, very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.3. Physical activity: (one study, 85 participants) based on short-term follow-up, a physical activity programme may cause a small reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -4.69 to -0.31, low QoE). This programme may not reduce anxiety or depression (low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction or quality of life.4. Prostatic massage: (two studies, 115 participants) based on short-term follow-up, we are uncertain whether the prostatic massage reduces or increases prostatitis symptoms compared with control (very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.5. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy: (three studies, 157 participants) based on short-term follow-up, extracorporeal shockwave therapy reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -6.18, 95% CI -7.46 to -4.89, high QoE). These results may not be sustained at medium-term follow-up (low QoE). This treatment may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events (low QoE). This treatment probably improves sexual dysfunction (MD in the IIEF Scale MD 3.34, 95% CI 2.68 to 4.00, one study, 60 participants, moderate QoE). We found no information regarding quality of life, depression or anxiety.6. Transrectal thermotherapy compared to medical therapy: (two studies, 237 participants) based on short-term follow-up, transrectal thermotherapy alone or in combination with medical therapy may decrease prostatitis symptoms slightly when compared with medical therapy alone (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.82 to -1.18, low QoE). One included study reported that participants may experience transient adverse events. We found no information regarding sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.7. Other interventions: there is uncertainty about the effects of most of the other interventions included in this review. We found no information regarding psychological support or prostatic surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings of moderate quality evidence, this review found that some non-pharmacological interventions such as acupuncture and extracorporeal shockwave therapy are likely to result in a decrease in prostatitis symptoms and may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse event. The QoE for most other comparisons was predominantly low. 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.

Non-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.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of non-pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases, 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 August 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available non-pharmacological interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies, performed statistical analyses and rated quality of evidence (QoE) according to the GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 unique studies with 3290 men with CP/CPPS across 23 comparisons.1. Acupuncture: (three studies, 204 participants) based on short-term follow-up, acupuncture reduces prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number of participants compared with sham procedure (mean difference (MD) in total NIH-CPSI score -5.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.32 to -4.26, high QoE). Acupuncture likely results in little to no difference in adverse events (moderate QoE). It probably also decreases prostatitis symptoms compared with standard medical therapy in an appreciable number of participants (MD -6.05, 95% CI -7.87 to -4.24, two studies, 78 participants, moderate QoE).2. Circumcision: (one study, 713 participants) based on short-term follow-up, early circumcision probably decreases prostatitis symptoms slightly (NIH-CPSI score MD -3.00, 95% CI -3.82 to -2.18, moderate QoE) and may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events compared with control (a waiting list to be circumcised, low QoE).3. Electromagnetic chair: (two studies, 57 participants) based on short-term follow-up, we are uncertain of the effects of the use of an electromagnetic chair on prostatitis symptoms. It may be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events compared with sham procedure (low to very low QoE).4. Lifestyle modifications: (one study, 100 participants) based on short-term follow-up, lifestyle modifications may be associated with a greater improvement in prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number of participants compared with control (risk ratio (RR) for improvement in NIH-CPSI scores 3.90, 95% CI 2.20 to 6.92, very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events.5. Physical activity: (one study, 85 participants) based on short-term follow-up, a physical activity programme may cause a small reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -4.69 to -0.31, low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events.6. Prostatic massage: (two studies, 115 participants) based on short-term follow-up, we are uncertain whether the prostatic massage reduces or increases prostatitis symptoms compared with control (very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events.7. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy: (three studies, 157 participants) based on short-term follow-up, extracorporeal shockwave therapy reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -6.18, 95% CI -7.46 to -4.89, high QoE). These results may not be sustained at medium-term follow-up (low QoE). This treatment may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events (low QoE).8. Transrectal thermotherapy compared to medical therapy: (two studies, 237 participants) based on short-term follow-up, transrectal thermotherapy alone or in combination with medical therapy may decrease prostatitis symptoms slightly when compared with medical therapy alone (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.82 to -1.18, low QoE). One included study reported that participants may experience transient adverse events.9. Other interventions: there is uncertainty about the effects of other interventions included in this review. We found no information regarding psychological support or prostatic surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Some of the interventions can decrease prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number without a greater incidence of adverse events. The QoE was mostly low. 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.

Efficacy of Low-Intensity Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy on Men With Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome Refractory to 3-As Therapy

Managing patients with chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) refractory to the traditional 3-As therapy (antibiotics, alpha-blockers, and anti-inflammatories) is a challenging task. Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (LI-ESWT) was recently reported to be able to improve pain, urinary symptoms, and even sexual function by inducing neovascularization and anti-inflammation, reducing muscle tone, and influencing nerve impulses. This study evaluates whether combined treatment with LI-ESWT can restore clinical ability and quality of life (QoL) in patients refractory to 3-As therapy. This was an open-label, single-arm prospective study. Patients with CPPS without more than a 6-point decrease in the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) total score under the maximal dosage of 3-As therapy were enrolled. LI-ESWT treatment consisted of 3,000 shock waves administered once weekly for 4 weeks. The NIH-CPSI, visual analog scale (VAS) score, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and the five-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) were used to evaluate efficacy at 1, 4, and 12 weeks after LI-ESWT. Thirty-three patients were enrolled in this study. After LI-ESWT treatment, 27 of the 33 patients (81.82%) had a successful response to LI-ESWT, with a decrease of 3.29 and 5.97 in the VAS score and total IPSS at the 3-month follow-up. Waist circumference was the only significant predictor of a successful response to LI-ESWT. LI-ESWT can serve as a salvage therapy for patients with CPPS refractory to traditional 3-As therapy. Further studies are needed to determine an adequate therapeutic protocol and important predictors in patients with different CPPS etiologies.

Hwanglyunhaedok Pharmacopuncture versus Saline Pharmacopuncture on Chronic Nonbacterial Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome

PURPOSE

Chronic nonbacterial prostatitis (CP)/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) is known not to have a successful therapy as yet. More recently, acupuncture, some herbal compounds, and trigger point injection have been reported to be beneficial. Pharmacopuncture is an herbal acupuncture having these benefits. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of HP (Hwanglyunhaedok Pharmacopuncture) versus normal saline injection (Saline Pharmacopuncture, SP) on CP/CPPS.

METHODS

A retrospective follow up study of 63 patients who were diagnosed with CP/CPPS was performed. All patients were treated with electroacupuncture and injected with either 1 ml of HP or SP at CV1 as a standard treatment for 4 weeks. Thus, the patients were classified in two groups: HP (n = 32) and SP group (n = 31). Treatment was applied twice a week every third day for 4 weeks. After 4 weeks, the effect of pharmacopunture in both groups was compared using NIH-CPSI (National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index) and IPSS (International Prostate Symptom Score) before and after treatment.

RESULTS

After treatment, the total NIH-CPSI scores were significantly reduced in both groups (p < 0.01). Pain domain scores in both groups showed significant decrease (p < 0.01). In HP group, urination (p < 0.05) and quality of life (p < 0.01) scores reduced significantly. In SP group, impact score showed significant decrease (p < 0.05). However, impact score in HP group and urination and quality of life scores in SP group didn't show any significance. IPSS score was reduced significantly after treatment in both groups (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that pharmacopuncture and electroacupuncture treatment were effective on CP/CPPS. HP and SP didn't show any significant difference. However, it was also confirmed that HP is more favorable than SP to improve the symptoms of CP/CPPS.

Investigating the Effect of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy on Reducing Chronic Pain in Patients with Pes Anserine Bursitis: A Randomized, Clinical- Controlled Trial

Background:

Knee pain, is one of the most common causes of patients’ referring to physiatric clinics, and several factors, are involved in its creation. One of these factors is pes anserine bursitis (PAB) for which various treatment methods are used. This study aims to investigate the effect of this method on reducing chronic pain in these patients.

Materials and Methods:

This clinical trial was conducted in 2013- 2014 on patients with PAB referring to academic, physical medicine clinics. The patients with chronic PAB (pain duration more than 3 months), who were refractory to conservative treatments, were randomly divided into two 20-member experimental groups (extracorporeal shock wave therapy [ESWT] and sham ESWT). Pain scores of all patients were measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) (total and present pain indexes [TPIs and PPIs]) before intervention, immediately after intervention (3^rd week), and after 8 weeks. The pain scores were then compared and statistically analyzed.

Results:

In the ESWT group, the mean patient pain score of the VAS and TPI in MPQ were significantly lower than in the sham ESWT group immediately after intervention (3^rd week): P =0.02, P = 0.04 respectively; and 8 weeks after the end of treatment: P =0.01, P = 0.000. Moreover, the PPI in both groups had significantly decreased over time, although in ESWT group this decrement was significantly more than sham ESWT group (P < 0.001).

Conclusion:

The results showed that ESWT could be effective in reducing the pain and treating PAB.

Cardiac shock-wave therapy in the treatment of coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To systematically review currently available cardiac shock-wave therapy (CSWT) studies in humans and perform meta-analysis regarding anti-anginal efficacy of CSWT.

METHODS

The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Medscape, Research Gate, Science Direct, and Web of Science databases were explored. In total 39 studies evaluating the efficacy of CSWT in patients with stable angina were identified including single arm, non- and randomized trials. Information on study design, subject's characteristics, clinical data and endpoints were obtained. Assessment of publication risk of bias was performed and heterogeneity across the studies was calculated by using random effects model.

RESULTS

Totally, 1189 patients were included in 39 reviewed studies, with 1006 patients treated with CSWT. The largest patient sample of single arm study consisted of 111 patients. All selected studies demonstrated significant improvement in subjective measures of angina symptoms and/or quality of life, in the majority of studies left ventricular function and myocardial perfusion improved. In 12 controlled studies with 483 patients included (183 controls) angina class, Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) score, nitrates consumption were significantly improved after the treatment. In 593 participants across 22 studies the exercise capacity was significantly improved after CSWT, as compared with the baseline values (in meta-analysis standardized mean difference SMD = -0.74; 95% CI, -0.97 to -0.5; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic review of CSWT studies in stable coronary artery disease (CAD) demonstrated consistent improvement of clinical variables. Meta-analysis showed a moderate improvement of exercise capacity. Overall, CSWT is a promising non-invasive option for patients with end-stage CAD, but evidence is limited to small sample single-center studies. Multi-center adequately powered randomised double blind studies are warranted.

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) in urology: a systematic review of outcome in Peyronie's disease, erectile dysfunction and chronic pelvic pain

PURPOSE

The objective was to evaluate high-level evidence studies of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) for urological disorders.

METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials reporting outcomes of ESWT in urology. Literature search on trials published in English using EMBASE, Medline and PubMed was carried out. The systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

We identified 10 trials on 3 urological indications. Two of 3 trials on Peyronie's disease (PD) involving 238 patients reported improvement in pain; however, no clinical significant changes in penile deviation and plaque size were observed. Four studies on erectile dysfunction (ED) including 337 participants were included. Using International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) and erectile hardness scale (EHS) data suggested a significant positive effect of ESWT in phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor (PDE-5i) responders in 2 of 4 trials and 3 of 4 trials, respectively. Three studies on chronic pelvic pain (CPP) engaging 200 men reported positive changes in National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI). There was considerable heterogeneity between trials both with regard to treatment techniques and outcome measures, making it difficult to compare results.

CONCLUSIONS

ESWT may resolve pain in PD patients, while evidence for reducing curvature and plaques size is poor. Effects of ESWT on IIEF in ED patients are inconsistent; however, data on EHS does imply that the treatment potentially may recover natural erection in PDE-5i responders. ESWT seems to be able to resolve pain in CPP patients in the short term. In all three disease entities, long-term outcome data are still warranted.

Long-term effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on the treatment of chronic pelvic pain syndrome due to non bacterial prostatitis

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence about the chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) treatment by shockwave therapy, and the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of extracorporeal shockwave therapy on CPPS due to non bacterial prostatitis in a long-term period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a follow-up survey, 40 patients with CPPS (that were randomly distributed into the treatment or sham groups were evaluated at 16, 20, and 24 weeks. In the treatment group, patients were treated by extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) once a week for 4 weeks by a protocol of 3000 impulses, 0.25 mJ/m(2) and 3 Hz of frequency. 0.05 mJ/m(2) were added in each week. In the sham group, the same protocol was applied, but with the probe being turned off. The follow-up assessments were done by visual analog scale for pain and National Institutes of Health-developed Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI). Data were compared using independent t-test or analysis of variences.

RESULTS

Three patients did not complete the study protocol, 37 patients were evlauated (19 patients in treatment and 18 patients in the sham group). At week 24, the mean of pain score, urinary score, quality-of-life and NIH-CPSI score between two groups were not statistically different.

CONCLUSION

Although, ESWT therapy as a safe and effective therapy in CPPS in short-term follow-up has been established, its long-term efficacy was not supported by this study.